AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
6 paragraphs · 131 wordsWe are unable to agree with the contention that because one of the minors has ceased to be a minor, the District Judge had no power to take
action u/s 45 of Act VIII of 1890 and require the guardian to deliver up any property of the ward that might be in his possession or under his
control. In our opinion the provisions of Section 41, Clause (3) of the Act and Section 45, Clause 1(c) are clear as to this.
We cannot follow the decision of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Nabu Behari v. Sheikh Mahomed as to the effect of the termination of
the guardianship on the powers of the Court under the section above quoted.
This appeal must be dismissed with costs.