Disposed

Kanta Devi v. Rattan Singh

Himachal Pradesh HC18 Sept 2026CMP/23728/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of two applications in a First Appeal from Order. First, it discharged Kanta Devi as natural guardian of Suraj, Raman and Mayank since they had attained majority, permitting them to pursue the case in their own capacity. Second, it ordered release of the entire compensation amount with up-to-date interest to all four applicants according to their shares, as the matter had been finally decided by the National Lok Adalat on 10.05.2025.

What did the court decide?

Discharge of Kanta Devi as natural guardian of appellants No.2 to 4; release of entire awarded compensation with up-to-date interest to appellants No.1 to 4 as per their respective shares, to be remitted to their bank accounts after verification.

Kanta Devi Vs Rattan Singh — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Himachal Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

Kanta Devi & ors. Vs. Rattan Singh & ors.

¶2

CMPs No.23726 & 23728 of 2026 in FAO No.161 of 2014

¶3

18.09.2026 Present: Mr. Aditya Chouhan, Advocate, for the applicants/appellants.

¶4

Ms. Chetna Thakur, Advocate, vice Mr. Saurav Rattan, Advocate, for non-applicant/respondent No.1.

¶5

Mr. P.S. Chandel, Advocate, for the non-applicants/ respondents No.2 & 5.

¶6

Mr. Arsh Chauhan, Advocate, for non-applicants/ respondents No.3 & 4.

¶7

CMP No.23728 of 2026

¶8

The instant application under Order 32, Rule 12, read with Section 151 of CPC has been filed on behalf of applicants/ appellants No.2 to 4, namely Suraj, Raman & Mayank, respectively, for discharging their natural guardian/mother Kanta Devi, i.e. appellant No.1, as they have attained the age of majority.

¶9

Heard. Having regard to the averments made in the application, which is duly supported with affidavits of applicants/ appellants No. 2 to 4 well as taking into consideration the fact that the they have now attained the age of majority, as is evident from the copies of their Aadhar Card, annexed with the application as Annexure A-5 (colly), the same is allowed and the natural guardian/mother Kanta Devi, i.e. appellant No.1, is ordered to be discharged from guardianship of applicants/

¶10

appellant No.2 to 4 and they are permitted to pursue the case in their own capacity.

¶11

The application stands disposed of.

¶12

CMP No.23726 of 2026

¶13

The present application under Section 151 of CPC has been maintained by the applicants/appellants No.1 to 4 for release of the awarded amount of compensation alongwith up-todate interest, falling in their respective shares, which is lying deposited in the Registry of this Court. As per the applicants, they are in dire need of money to meet out their day-to-day expenses, therefore, it is prayed that the entire awarded amount of compensation alongwith up-to-date interest be released in their favour, as per their respective shares.

¶14

No reply is intended to be filed. Learned counsel for the non-applicants/respondents No.2 & 5 has stated that he has no objection in case the prayer made in the application is allowed.

¶15

Heard. Having perused the averments made in the application, which are duly supported with affidavits of the applicants/appellants No.1 to 4, coupled with the fact that the matter stands finally decided before the National Lok Adalat on 10.05.2025, this Court finds it in the interest of justice to release the entire awarded amount of compensation alongwith up-to-date interest in favour of applicants/appellants No.1 to 4, as per their

¶16

respective shares in the total awarded amount of compensation, which is lying deposited in the Registry of this Court, after proper verification and identification by remitting the same to their respective bank accounts, details whereof have been given in para-5 of the application.

¶17

The application stands disposed of.

¶18

( Sushil Kukreja ) Judge

¶19

September 18, 2026

¶20

(V.Himalvi)

Kanta Devi v. Rattan Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kanta Devi v. Rattan Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases