Dismissed¶36

Radha Rukmani v. Sunil Kumar

Guardianship – Guardian and Wards Act

Andhra Pradesh HC19 Dec 2025CMA/1286/2012

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati - Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1286/2012, decided 20.12.2025 (Ravi Nath Tilhari and Maheswara Rao Kuncheam JJ.; judgment per Tilhari J). Radha Rukmani (maternal grandmother, appellant) v. Sunil Kumar (respondent): appeal against dismissal of her guardianship petition (Guardian GOP No. 192/2008, order dated 28.09.2012, District Judge, Chittoor) under Sections 7, 9 and 10 of the Guardian and Wards Act; dismissed as infructuous because the minor attained majority during the pendency of the appeal; pending miscellaneous petitions closed; no order as to costs.

What did the court decide?

Since the minor child attained majority during the pendency of the appeal, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed as infructuous. ¶36

Radha Rukmani Vs Sunil Kumar — Andhra Pradesh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

[3524]

¶2

APHC010449962012

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

SATURDAY,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM

¶8

CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 1286/2012

¶9

Between:

¶10

RADHA RUKMANI, W/O. K. RATHNAM OCC: HOUSE WIFE R/O. D.NO. 13-109 EGUVA CHARNADA STREET CHITTOOR TOWN AND MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT

¶11

...APPELLANT

¶12

AND

¶13

SUNIL KUMAR, S/o. Manikyam Occ: Ex-Counselor and Business R/o. D.No. 1-1 Kasthuriba Street Tharapadavedu Katpadi Taluk Vellore District Tamilnadu State

¶14

...RESPONDENT

¶15

Appeal Under Section_____against orders

¶16

IA NO: 1 OF 2012(CMAMP 2448 OF 2012

¶17

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant injunction in favour of the appellant restraining the respondent in any manner to take the custody of the minor from her possession by suspending the operation of the Order passed in Guardian GOP No. 192/2008 dated 28.09.2012 on the file of the Court of the District Judge, Chittoor District, pending disposal of the CMA.

¶18

IA NO: 1 OF 2013(CMAMP 122 OF 2013

¶19

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to take up the main appeal by disposing of the same instead of taking up the issue of interim custody of the minor child andpass.

¶20

IA NO: 2 OF 2013(CMAMP 201 OF 2013

¶21

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to modify the tentative orders of his Hon'ble court passed in CMAMPNo.2448/2012, CMA1286/2012, dt. 29-01-2013 by giving full custody of the petitioner minor son to the petitioner,and pass.

¶22

IA NO: 3 OF 2013(CMAMP 202 OF 2013

¶23

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to directing the Station House Officer, II Town Police Station, Chittoor and the Superintendent of Police Chittoor to hand over the Minor boy Mr. Sreekanth to the petitioner forthwith in his own welfare and pass.

¶24

IA NO: 1 OF 2014(CMAMP 333 OF 2014

¶25

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased stay of all further proceedings in I.A.No.666 of 2013 before the Prl Junior Civil Judge, Chitoor pending above Civil Misc Appeal

¶26

Counsel for the Appellant:

¶27

1.T V SRI DEVI

¶28

Counsel for the Respondent:

¶29

1.K S GOPALA KRISHNAN

¶30

The Court made the following:

¶31

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 1286/2012

¶32

JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari)

¶33

The petition filed by the maternal grandmother seeking appointment as guardian of minor child under Sections 7, 9 and 10 of the Guardian and Wards Act was dismissed by the learned District Judge, Chittoor. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal was preferred by the maternal grandmother.

¶34

Sri C.Upendra, learned counsel representing Ms.T.V.Sri Devi, learned counsel for the appellant submits that during the pendency of the appeal, the minor child attained majority.

¶35