Gopal Jena v. Shankar Jena

CMP NO.973 OF 2019

4 16.10.2019 In view of the resolution of the Orissa High Court Bar Association, the lawyers abstain from attending the Court.

Perused the grounds involving the challenge to the order dated 1.7.2019 involving rejection of an application under Order 32(3) of C.P.C. praying for appointment of guardian in respect of the minor defendant nos.9, 10 & 11 at the relevant point of time. For the disclosure in the impugned order, defendant nos.9 & 10, who were aged about 11 & 8 respectively in the year 2007, have already become majors by the time, the impugned order was passed on 1.7.2019. So far as defendant no.11 is concerned, the trial court clearly observed that there was already representation of defendant no.11 through the maternal grandfather. The application under Order 32(3) of C.P.C. did not disclose either Bhikari Patra, the maternal grandfather representing defendant no.1, was surviving or there is any allegation against the said guardian representative for not taking care of the interest of defendant no.11 requiring such modification.

For the reasons therein, this Court finds, there is no infirmity in the impugned order requiring interference with the same.

The C.M.P. thus stands dismissed.

………………………… Biswanath Rath, J.

m

2