Gulab Bai and Anr. v. Puniya - (Supreme Court) (07 Oct 1965)

Supreme Court clears confusions about infant Rajasthan High Court’s competence

MANU/SC/0017/1965

Civil

Fifty years ago the Supreme Court faced the unique dilemma of telling a still ‘young’ Rajasthan High Court to become besotted with its appellate authority: probably not the kind of advice it would give today. It held that a decision of the trial court under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, is final, unless it is appealed under Section 47 of the Act; similarly, an order passed by a Single judge of the High Court, on appeal from the trial court, is also final, subject to the Division Bench determining its jurisdiction. The Supreme Court had remanded the matter back to the High Court for disposal, determining that in a back and forth of decisions and appeals, each finding contrary to the last, the matter needed perhaps a more just finality. The order must have come as more than just a little relief to the little-mentioned ‘ward’ who had been bounced around between the Respondent ‘real’ parents and the Appellant foster parents who had looked after her for many years. With underlying notes of caste, it was the higher caste Respondents who had placed their daughter in the custody of the lower caste Appellants to “save the child” from whatever misfortune caused the Respondents to lose “some children in their infancy”.

Relevant : Union of India (UOI) vs. Mohindra Supply Company MANU/SC/0004/1961 L. Ram Sarup vs. Mt. Kaniz Ummehani MANU/UP/0056/1936

Tags : HIGH COURT APPEAL FINALITY