THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.360 of 2010 12.03.2010 Between: Smt Balam Chandra Kala (died) And others ….Petitioners AND Kothapalli Ram Babu …Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.V.S.RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.360 OF 2010 ORDER: The respondent filed suit being O.S.No.119 of 2004 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Bhimavaram, for recovery of certain amount based on promissory note. The promissory note was executed by one Balam Madhava Rao. As he died the suit was filed against his legal representatives. The suit was decreed for Rs.1,50,000/-. Respondent filed E.P.No.91 of 2006. As petitioners 4 and 5 herein at the relevant time were minors, they were represented by their mother Balam Chandra Kala, later she died. Thereafter, Balam Lakshmamma, grandmother, was representing the minor Judgment Debtors (J.Drs.,). She also died. At that stage, third petitioner herein filed E.A.No.296 of 2008 under Order XXXII Rules 3 and 4 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) praying the execution Court to permit him to represent petitioners 4 and 5 being minors. By impugned order, dated 29.09.2009, the same was dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, present civil revision petition is filed. By the time civil revision petition is filed, fourth petitioner attained majority. Therefore, the other question is whether third petitioner can be permitted to represent to act as Guardian to fifth petitioner. When the matter was called on 11.02.2010, this Court directed the counsel for petitioner to produce Secondary School Certificate issued by Board of Secondary Education. Today, a xerox copy of Secondary School Certificate is produced before this Court. It shows that the fifth petitioner was born on 02.08.1992. This only means that he is still a minor. In the absence of mother, father and grandmother, there cannot be any objection to permit third petitioner to represent fifth petitioner to act as Guardian. The Court below erred in taking into consideration the approximate age mentioned in the earlier proceedings. In view of the same, the impugned order is set aside. E.A.No.296 of 2008 is allowed permitting the third petitioner herein to represent the fifth petitioner as Guardian. The civil revision petition is accordingly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________ (V.V.S.RAO, J) 12.03.2010 Pln