SHAMRAO Vs. TATYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE trial Court appointed Mr. T.A. Pande, a pleader of Akola, as guardian ad litem of the minor defendant 2 and fixed his remuneration at Rs. 50. The suit was dismissed and the plaintiff appealed. The appellate Court has fixed Rs. 150 as Mr. Pande's remuneration for defending the appeal and has ordered the plaintiff-appellant to deposit that amount in Court. The plaintiff-appellant, who is the applicant in this Court, contends that the appellate Court had no jurisdiction to make such an order and that the amount fixed is excessive.

(2.) UNDER Order 32, Rule 4, Civil P. C., the Court may appoint any of its officers to be such guardian and may direct that the costs to be incurred by such officer in the performance of his duties shall be borne by one or more of the parties to the suit. The decision in. Mohan Lal v. Ganga Prasad shows that the Court may provide for the costs to be incurred by the guardian in order to obtain legal assistance even when the guardian is himself a pleader. The appellate Court therefore had jurisdiction to make the order.