Minor is incompetent to relinquish maintenance personally or through his guardian.
The second contention raised by Shri Radhye is that the deed of relinquishment (Ex. D-1) is binding on the plaintiff and, therefore, in any event, she could not claim from the defendant more than Rs. 100 per year, as stated in that deed.
11. This contention also, in our opinion, is without any substance. In Shewatlbai v. Shamrao, Second Appeal No. 436 of 1951, dated 10-1-1952 (Nag). Hidayatullah, J. (as he then was) held that relinquishment being a personal act could only be performed by that, person and not vicariously. A minor is, therefore, incompetent to relinquish personally or through his guardian. It is in evidence that Ramabai was born on 9-12-1942 about three months after her father's death. At the time when Ex. D-1 was executed by her mother, Smt. Gangubai, she was only six years of age. Smt. Gangubai therefore as her guardian had no right to relinquish her rights. Therefore, the document (Ex. D-1) has no binding force on the plaintiff and in spite of the terms of that deed, she is entitled to claim proper amount of maintenance. This contention, therefore, fails.1
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sou. Ramabai W/O Ambadas vs Meerabai D/O Narayan Rao on 9 April, 1965
Equivalent citations: AIR 1967 MP 86
Bench: S Bhargava, S Dayal
https://www.lawweb.in/2013/10/minor-is-incompetent-to-relinquish.html
