Back
H. P. SANDESH
T. Sheshadri – Appellant
Versus
Srinivasa Prakash – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. This appeal is filed challenging the order dtd. 15/9/2021, passed on I.A.No.10 in O.S.No.202/2017, on the file of the LXI Additional City Civil Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City (CCH-62), allowing I.A.No.10 filed under Sec. 50(1), (4) of the Mental Health Act, 1987 ('the Act for short) read with Sec. 151 of CPC for appointment of psychiatrist who is expert in the field to ascertain the mental capacity of the plaintiff and to submit the report.
2. The factual matrix of the case of the plaintiff is that the suit is filed for the relief of declaration to declare that all the acts done by defendant Nos.1 and 2 i.e., selling of the property of unsound mind plaintiff without seeking any permission from the Court or appointment of guardian as null and void. The plaintiff also interalia filed I.A.No.10 under Sec. 50(1) and (4) of Mental Health Act, 1987 read with Sec. 151 of CPC praying the Court to appoint a Senior Psychiatrist or a Psychologist an expert in the field to assess the mental condition of the plaintiff and call for report. In support of the application, an affidavit is sworn to by the next friend that the plaintiff is the son of M.R. Krishnaswamy Iyengar and Jaya Kris
The court established that under the Mental Health Act, 1987, a judicial inquiry into the mental capacity of an individual is essential when there are allegations of mental incapacity affecting legal....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the mandatory nature of referring proof of mental illness for further scrutiny to the concerned Board under Section 105 of the Mental Healthcare Ac....
Point of Law : Section 105 of Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 deals with procedure to be followed in a judicial process where any proof of mental illness of a person is produced.
The court has discretion under the Mental Health Act 2001 to order an inquiry into a person's mental capacity, requiring the applicant to establish a prima facie case of mental disorder.
(1) Unsound mind – Matters involving persons of unsound mind, the Court must exercise utmost caution and diligence to ensure that the rights of such individuals are protected. Order XXXII, Rule 15 of....
The court has discretion under the Mental Health Act to order an inquiry into a person's mental capacity, requiring the establishment of a prima facie case by the applicant.
The court has discretion under the Mental Health Act to order an inquiry if a prima facie case for mental disorder is established, with the requisite burden on the applicant to prove this before any ....
A court must apply a two-tier process in mental capacity inquiries: first determining if a prima facie case exists, then allowing the subject an opportunity to rebut the allegations before deciding w....
The court established that an inquiry is mandatory under Order 32 Rule 15 CPC to determine if a party is incapable of protecting their interests due to mental infirmity before appointing a next frien....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
