1 fa 340.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO. 340 OF 2011 Shaikh Zakir Shaikh Karim and others .. Appellants Versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent Shri Dhananjay A. Naik, Advocate for Appellants. Shri B. G. Sonwane, A.G.P. for the Respondent/State. CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 23RD MARCH, 2011. PER COURT : . The present appeal is directed against the order dated 04.01.2011 passed by the District Judge - 3, Aurangabad rejecting the application of the appellants filed U/Sec. 28 of the Guardians and Wards Act 1890 seeking permission to sell the property. Vide the impugned order the District Judge has rejected the application on the count that the appellants could not show as to how and in what circumstances the alienation is going to be benefited to the miners. 2. Shri Naik, learned counsel states that, the land is required 2 fa 340.11 to be sold for the educational purpose of the minors. Because of financial difficulty, they are not in a position to attend the school. The appellant No. 1 has purchased the property in the name of minors and from sell of the property the amount realized would be utilized for the welfare of the minors. According to the learned counsel, the appellant No. 1 is a labourer and all his savings were utilized for purchase of the property in the name of minors who are his sons. It was also contended by the learned counsel that it was also not possible to cultivate the land as it is situated at Bhindon and appellants resides at Chitegaon. According to the learned counsel the Court has not taken into consideration this aspect. 3. Shri Sonwane, learned A.G.P. supports the order passed by the Court below and submits that the application nowhere depicts the fact that the sell is for the welfare of the minors and is in the interest of minors. 4. I have gone through the application and order passed. The fact that the appellant No. 1 has purchased the property in the name of minors is matter of record. No doubt, when the permission is sought to sell the property standing in the name of minors the appellant No. 1 has to show the sell is in the interest 3 fa 340.11 of minor and the Court has to arrive at the objective satisfaction of the same. The application filed by the appellants is bereft of all these particulars. In absence of such necessary particulars the Court below has taken a proper view. The appellants have no- where shown as to the probable price which is likely to be received and the proposed utilization of the same. It is nowhere stated as to how much amount would be kept in the name of minors and the details of the amount utilized for various purposes for the welfare and interest of minors. 5. In such circumstances, the impugned order does not suffer from any illegality and the first appeal as such is dismissed with no order as to costs. 6. The dismissal of the appeal would not preclude the appellants to file a fresh application seeking permission to sell the property, in case the appellants give the details as are necessary for grant of permission to sell the property in the name of minors. No costs. [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ] bsb/March. 11