IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.6458 of 2008 Date of decision:05.03.2009. Parkasho ...Petitioner Versus Neelam and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D.ANAND. Present: None for the petitioner. Mr. G.S.Jagpal, Advocate, for Mr. R.S.Bajaj, Advocate, for respondent No.1. ***** S.D.ANAND, J. (ORAL) As per the report made by the Registry, the service by publication could not be effected upon respondent No.2 for want of deposit of publication charges. Same was the position on the previous two dates of hearing i.e. 15.12.2008 and 02.02.2009. The petitioner and respondent No.1 herein are the widowed paternal grandmother and mother respectively of the children. The former had applied under the Guardian and Wards Act for appointment, as guardian, of those minors. Though it is apparent from the record that the petitioner herein had availed of four effective opportunities for adducing evidence, it cannot be ignored from consideration that such like proceedings pertain to human relationship wherein it may not be just and appropriate to apply the strict procedural provisions. In the circumstances of the case, the petition shall stand allowed. The petitioner shall be entitled to the grant of one opportunity for concluding her evidence, subject to the payment of Rs.2,000/- as costs. Disposed of accordingly. March 05, 2009 (S.D.Anand) vinod Judge