CR No.4888 of 2016 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CR No.4888 of 2016
Date of Decision: 26.07.2017
Sarabjeet Kaur ……Petitioner
Vs
Iqbal Singh …..Respondent
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ MOHAN SINGH
Present:Mr. Rajbir Singh, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Angreze Dhindsa, Advocate
for respondent.
****
RAJ MOHAN SINGH, J.(Oral)
On 18.07.2017, following order was passed:-
“Application under Section 25 of the Guardians and
Wards Act, 1890 filed by the respondent was accepted
by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sangrur vide order
dated 16.09.2015 while exercising the powers of
Guardian Judge under the Guardians and Wards Act,
1890. Against the said order, an appeal was filed
before the Additional District Judge, Sangrur. The order
dated 16.09.2015 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior
Division), Sangrur was upheld by the Additional District
Judge, Sangrur vide order dated 18.03.2016. The
present revision petition has been filed by the
wife/petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of
India against both the aforesaid orders.
At the time of notice of motion, following order was
passed on 02.08.2016:-
“Counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends
1 of 3
::: Downloaded on – 30-07-2017 19:08:38 :::
CR No.4888 of 2016 2that though the appeal aginst the order passed
by the guardian Judge was preferred by the
petitioner but as the District Judge is not
competent to decide the appeal against the
judgment/order passed by the guardian Judge
exercising the delegated power of the District
Judge, the judgment passed by the Additional
District Judge, Sangrur, affirming the judgment
passed by the guardian Judge being without
jurisdiction is liable to be set aside. Notice of
motion for 28.11.2016. In the meantime,
operation of the impugned order shall remain
stayed.”
In view of Section 47(c) of the Guardians and Wards
Act, 1890, the order passed under Section 25 of the
Act whether granting or refusing the application is
appealable and the appeal lies to the High Court.
Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks time to
convince this Court that if the order under Section 25 of
the Act is passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division)
exercising the powers of Guardian Judge, then the
appeal lies to the Court of District Judge.
Adjourned to 26.07.2017.”
The case was adjourned at the instance of the
petitioner to enable him to satisfy the Court that the order
passed under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890
is not appealable.
During course of arguments, learned counsel for the
2 of 3
::: Downloaded on – 30-07-2017 19:08:39 :::
CR No.4888 of 2016 3
petitioner could not bring any such precedent vide which it can
be gathered that the order passed under Section 25 of the Act
is not appealable under Section 47(c) of the Guardians and
Wards Act, 1890.
In view of above, no interference in the present revision
petition is called for, however, petitioner may take recourse to
the lawful remedies available to her.
Dismissed.
July 26, 2017. (RAJ MOHAN SINGH)
Prince JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
3 of 3
::: Downloaded on – 30-07-2017 19:08:39 :::
