Guardians not allowed to alienate property willed to minors

S Shyam Prasad

Bengaluru: The High Court has dismissed an appeal filed by the guardians of three children who wanted to sell two immovable properties willed to the minors purportedly for the sake of their education.

The HC found that one of the children was only one year old, the second one was in nursery and the third in eight standard and their education did not require selling of immovable properties.

“Since the Court is considering the petition seeking permission to alienate the properties of the minors, the Court has to keep the interest of the minor as a paramount consideration. Absolutely nothing on record to justify as to why both the immovable properties are to be sold for the purpose of education of the minors who are said to be studying only in 8th Standard and Nursery,” the High Court bench of Justice Alok Aradeh and Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde said in their recent judgment.

Dismissing the appeal filed on behalf of the three children, the HC said, “It is also not stated as to whether they will be left with any other property after the sale of the properties. For these reasons this Court is of the view that no grounds are made out to allow the appeal.”

The appeal was filed on behalf of James Nicholas L, 13, Jeevesh Adhvik, 1 and Saanvi M, 5. The three were respectively by Manju M, mother, Srinivas M, father and Lakshmi Devi M, mother.

One Lakshmaiah, a bachelor, was the original owner of the two properties. He executed a Will in September 1994 creating interest in favour of Manju, Srinivas and Lakshmi Devi who were children of his brother Muniraju.

The Will stipulated that the children of Manju, Srinivas and Lakshmi Devi will inherit the property but they will not have the right to alienate the properties. Manju, Srinivas and Lakshmi Devi approached the Civil Court seeking permission to alienate the property on ground that it was required for the education of their children.

The Civil Court dismissed their contention and they approached the High Court. The HC in its judgement said, “The Courts will permit the guardians to alienate the property of a minor only if the alienation is for the benefit of a minor. Thus, the Court has to consider whether the persons seeking the permission of the Court to alienate the minors’ properties have made out the grounds.”

The HC found doubts in the contentions of the guardians. “The petitioners have not stated as to what is the expenditure needed for education of the children and how much the shortfall is taking into their income. The value of the properties to be sold is not disclosed. It is also not stated that for what value they intend to sell the properties. Since petitioners are stated to be studying in 8th standard and nursery, the claim to sell the two sites for the purpose of education does not impress the Court,” the HC said.

Upholding the lower court order the HC said, “The Trial Court in terms of the impugned order has held that it is the duty of the guardian of the children to provide education for the children and no materials are placed to show that the guardians of the petitioners are unable to provide education to the petitioners.”