LANDMARK CASE
Githa Hariharan v. Reserve Bank of India
(1999) 2 SCC 228 · Supreme Court of India · Family law
At a glance
- Citation: (1999) 2 SCC 228
- Court: Supreme Court of India
- Area of law: Family law
- In one line: No. 'After' was read as 'in the absence of', so the mother can act as guardian in many situations.
1 Facts
The RBI refused a mother's application as guardian of her minor child.
2 Issue
Is the father the only natural guardian under the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act?
3 What the court decided
No. 'After' was read as 'in the absence of', so the mother can act as guardian in many situations.
4 Why it matters
It advanced gender equality in guardianship.
5 Think about it
How did the Court read the statute to avoid striking it down?
6 Analyse it yourself
Read the full judgment from an official source or a law database, then brief it in seven steps: facts, issues, arguments, decision, ratio, obiter and significance. Always check the citation before you rely on it.
7 More cases on Family law
- ABC v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2015) 10 SCC 1
- Amardeep Singh v. Harveen Kaur (2017) 8 SCC 746
- Badshah v. Urmila Badshah Godse (2014) 1 SCC 188
- Bai Tahira v. Ali Hussain Fidaalli Chothia (1979) 2 SCC 316
- Chanmuniya v. Virendra Kumar Singh Kushwaha (2011) 1 SCC 141
- D. Velusamy v. D. Patchaiammal (2010) 10 SCC 469
All 366 landmark cases · Today's Case of the Day · Weekly quiz
← Girish Ramchandra Deshpande v. Central Information CommissionerGloucester Grammar School Case →
A short teaching summary for students. Educational content only, not legal advice.