CRP 347/2010 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.P. KATAKEY Heard Mr. PK Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. K Agarwal, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. The petitioner, who is the mother of the minor child, namely Sri Joydeep Nandi, by the present application filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has challenged the order dated 11th August, 2010 passed by the learned Additiona l District and Sessions Judge (FTC), Karimganj, whereby and where-under the appl ication filed by the present opposite parties for substitution of their names in place of the deceased/applicant Satyendra Ch. Nandi has been allowed in Misc. ( Guardianship) Case No.18/2005. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the parties on the last oc casion, i.e. on 16th November, 2010, expressed their willingness to resolve thei r dispute since it is between the daughter-in-law and the mother-in-law as well as the brother-in-law relating to the guardianship of the minor boy of the petit ioner, whose father died on 21st October, 2002. In the order dated 16th Novembe r, 2010, it has also been observed that the grand-mother, the respondent No.1, h as only claimed the visiting right of her grand-son, namely Master Joydeep Nandi . Mr. Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner on the basis of the written instruct ion has submitted that the petitioner has no objection if the mother-in-law come s to Karimganj and visit her grand-son, who is going to appear in the High Schoo l Leaving Certificate Examination (HSLC) scheduled to be held in the month of Fe bruary-March, 2011. Mr. Agarwal, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, whose names are subs tituted in place of the original applicant in the guardianship proceeding, has a lso submitted that the respondents are not interested in the guardianship of the minor child, i.e. the respondent No.1’s grand-son, but the respondent Nos.1 and 2, the grand-mother and the paternal uncle are interested only for the visiting right of Master Joydeep Nandi. Mr. Agarwal further submits that as it appears from paragraph 2 in the petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India that Master Joydeep Nandi is a student of Class-VIII and, therefore, the s ubmission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that he is going to appear i n the HSLC examination may not be correct. Be that as it may, since the respondents are claiming the visiting right, to whi ch the petitioner has no objection, the present petition is disposed of with the direction to the petitioner to allow the respondents to meet Master Joydeep Nan di once in a month in Karimganj and/or where the petitioner resides. The respond ents shall be permitted to meet Master Joydeep Nandi together for which they sha ll inform the petitioner at least 1 (one) week before so that necessary arrangem ent for meeting either in Karimganj or where the petitioner resides can be arran ged. The parties being closely related, the petitioner may also explore the pos sibility of allowing her son to go with the grand-mother during the vacation for a week. Since the respondents are not willing to pursue with the guardianship proceeding in view of the order passed today, the learned Court below shall pass necessary order closing the said proceeding. The petition is accordingly disposed of. No cost.