Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 1212 (MAD)

GAYATHIRI v. U. K. N. SURESH

2020-08-06

T.RAJA

body2020
ORDER 1. Heard the parties through Video Conferencing due to COVID-19 pandemic. 2. The appellant has filed this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal against the order passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Thiruppur, in H.M.G.O.P.No.91 of 2018, dated 21.12.2018, declining to sell the property belonging to the minor daughters of the appellant. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that while the appellant's husband/Babu was alive, a settlement deed was executed in his favour by his father/Somasundaram on 29.05.2013. However, he died on 16.01.2015 in a road accident leaving behind his wife/appellant herein and his two minor daughters, namely, B.Sudharsana and B.Dhanyasree. Since the appellant was eking out her livelihood only from the income received from her parents, she was finding it difficult to meet out the educational expenses of her two minor daughters and they are studying in St. Pieter Matriculation School, Indira Nagar, Palani, and their annual tuition fees is Rs. 18,000/- each per year. Finding it very difficult to survive and maintain her two minor children, she wanted to sell the property settled in favour of her husband by his father vide Settlement Deed dated 29.05.2013. Therefore, she has filed H.M.G.O.P.No.91 of 2018 before the learned Principal District Judge, Thiruppur. Although learned Principal District Judge accepted the case of the appellant that the property in question belongs to Late Babu, husband of appellant, yet refused to grant permission to sell the property in question and thereby dismissed the petition by holding that the appellant has not produced sufficient evidence to satisfy the Court that two minor children are pursuing their studies in a particular School and no document was adduced to show that she has been paying tuition fees to her minor children. Aggrieved by the same, she has filed the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that from the date of death of her husband, the appellant has been paying tuition fees to both of her minor daughters and to substantiate the same, learned counsel has filed additional typed set of papers showing the tuition fees paid by the appellant to her minor daughters between 2016 and 2019. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that from the date of death of her husband, the appellant has been paying tuition fees to both of her minor daughters and to substantiate the same, learned counsel has filed additional typed set of papers showing the tuition fees paid by the appellant to her minor daughters between 2016 and 2019. The appellant's husband/Late Babu was having only the subject property in question and therefore, in the said property, the appellant is having l/3rd share and her two minor daughters are having 2/3rd share, hence, she wanted to dispose the property in question only for the welfare of minor children and for their studies. 5. Earlier, when the matter was taken up on 19.02.2020,respondent/U.K.N.Suresh was present and he has expressed his willingness to buy the property in question. For better appreciation, order passed by this Court on the said date is extracted below:- "Heard the learned counsel for the Appellant. The Respondent herein, viz. U.K.N.Suresh (Cell No.98432 24339; Aadhar No.2533 6855 0450), who is the buyer of the property in question, is present before this Court and in support of his identity, he has produced a copy of his Aadhar Card. 2. Learned counsel for the Appellant submitted that, out of the total amount payable by the Respondent/buyer towards purchase of the property in question, two-thirds belong to the minor daughters of the Appellant. He ensured that, the share of the minor daughters will be utilized only for the purchase of a land in their names jointly, in and around Palani or any other place. 3. This Court makes it clear that it is open to the Respondent/buyer, who is present before this Court, to pay the amount towards purchase of the Appellant's property, on condition that, two-thirds of the total amount due to the minor daughters of the Appellant, are paid to the seller of the property, who sells the same in favour of the minor daughters of the Appellant, with the Appellant as the Guardian. It is further made clear that the Appellant will have no other claim in the property purchased in favour of the minor daughters, in any manner, either to alienate, mortgage or part with the same. It is also made clear that if there is no seller, the Court will not permit the Appellant to purchase the property. 4. It is further made clear that the Appellant will have no other claim in the property purchased in favour of the minor daughters, in any manner, either to alienate, mortgage or part with the same. It is also made clear that if there is no seller, the Court will not permit the Appellant to purchase the property. 4. Learned counsel for the Appellant ensured that, the Appellant will purchase a property in the names of her minor daughters, and produce the Sale Deed before this Court on 27.02.2020. 5. List this matter on 27.02.2020, immediately after 'Admission' cases." From the above said order, it is clear that learned counsel for the appellant has agreed to utilize 2/3rd of minor daughters' share for purchase of a land in their names jointly in and around Palani or any other place. The above said order further shows that it is open to the respondent/buyer to pay the amount towards purchase of the appellant's property on condition that 2/3rd of the total amount due to the minor daughters of the appellant are paid to the seller of the property who sells the same in favour of minor daughters of the appellant, with the appellant as Guardian. It was further made clear that the appellant will have no other claim in the property purchased in favour of minor daughters in any manner either to alienate, mortgage or part with the same. 6. When the matter is taken up today, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that as per direction of this Court on 19.02.2020, the property in question was sold to the respondent. Thereafter, from and out of total sale consideration, l/3rd share has been given to the appellant and 2/3rd share of total consideration has been utilized for the purpose of purchasing the property in favour of two minor daughters and to corroborate the same, he has produced a copy of the Sale Deed dated 05.03.2020 bearing Document No.673/2020 executed in favour of two minor daughters of the appellant/Gayathiri. 7. Therefore, as stated above, since the appellant has produced the bills to establish that she has been paying tuition fees to the tune of Rs. 18,000/- each per year between 2016 and 2019 to her minor daughters, who are studying at St. 7. Therefore, as stated above, since the appellant has produced the bills to establish that she has been paying tuition fees to the tune of Rs. 18,000/- each per year between 2016 and 2019 to her minor daughters, who are studying at St. Pieter Matriculation School, Indira Nagar, Palani, I am of the considered view that selling of the property in question is very much necessary for the welfare of two minor daughters and continuation of their studies in the said School. Thus, the impugned fair and final order passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Thiruppur, in H.M.G.O.P.No.91 of 2018, dated 21.12.2018, declining to grant permission to sell the property in question is liable to be set aside and accordingly, it is set aside. Consequently, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal stands allowed. No Costs.