spb/- 1 ao1343-10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 1343 OF 2010 ALONGWITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1654 OF 2010 IN A.O. NO.1343/2010 Shankar Tatyaba Nikam, since deceased : Dnyaneshwar Shankar Nikam & Anr. ... Appellants. Vs. Dharmaji Tatyaba Nikam & Ors. ... Respondents. --- Mr.S.S. Patwardhan for the Appellants. ----- CORAM : D. G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 09th DECEMBER, 2010. P.C. 1 This Appeal under Order 43, Rule 1 (c) of the Code of Civil Procedure is directed against an order dated 23rd September, 2010 passed by the Principal District Judge, Satara whereby the matter was remanded back to the trial court for fresh hearing in the light of the observations made in the said order by the lower Appellate Court. 2 One of the ground for remand is that the original defendant no.3 in the suit was minor when the suit was filed and when the suit was heard spb/- 2 ao1343-10.sxw and decided. The suit was heard and decided without appointing a guardian for the minor - defendant no.3. Though the defendant no.3 was represented in the suit by his father as a natural guardian, the father was not in fact appointed as the guardian by the court. He acted as a de facto guardian but without proper authority. The appellate court held that since the suit was heard and decided without appointment of a guardian was a ground for remand of the suit. 3 Order 32 Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that where the defendant is a minor, the court on being satisfied of the fact that defendant is a minor, the court shall appoint appropriate person to be a guardian in the suit for such minor. Provisions of Order 32 Rule 3 are mandatory. Since the suit was heard without following the mandatory provisions of Order 32 Rule 3, the lower Appellate Court committed no error in setting aside the decree and remanding the matter back to the trial court. No interference is called for in the impugned order. 4 Hence, the Appeal is dismissed summarily. 5 In view of the dismissal of the Appeal itself, the Civil Application No. 1654/2010 does not survive and the same is disposed of. [D.G. KARNIK, J.]