SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(Ker) 391

Judges : K.A.MOHAMED SHAFI
Kunhamma - Appellant
Versus
Rosakkutty - Respondent
Case No : CRP No. 1473 of 1996
Decided On : 11/13/1996
Advocates Appeared :
R. Bhaskaran For Petitioner A.K. Basheer For Respondent

The importance of a proper judicial enquiry and expert assistance in determining the mental capacity of individuals with mental impairments.

Headnote:

Next Friend - Mental Incapacity - 0.32 R.15 CPC - The court conducted an enquiry to determine whether the alleged mentally impaired person was capable of looking after his affairs. The lower court's reliance on gestures and signs of a deaf and dumb person without expert assistance was deemed unsafe. The court directed a proper judicial enquiry with the assistance of necessary experts.

Fact of the Case:

The next friend filed a suit for a permanent prohibitory injunction on behalf of a mentally impaired person. The lower court, without proper enquiry, found the person capable of looking after his affairs and removed the next friend.

Finding of the Court:

The court found the lower court's enquiry unsatisfactory and directed a proper judicial enquiry with the assistance of necessary experts.

Issues: The main issue was the sufficiency of the lower court's enquiry to determine the mental capacity of the person in question.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for a proper judicial enquiry, especially when dealing with mentally impaired individuals, and the importance of expert assistance in interpreting gestures and signs of a deaf and dumb person.

Final Decision: The revision petition was allowed, the impugned order was set aside, and the lower court was directed to conduct a proper judicial enquiry with the assistance of necessary experts.

Judgment :-

K.A. Mohammed Shafi, J.

O.S. No. 45/95 was filed before the Munsiff s Court, Nadapuram by the revision petitioner, as the next friend of one Pulikkal Thomas, to whom the plaint schedule property belongs, for a permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendant from alienating the plaint schedule property and cutting and removing valuable trees from the property. It is alleged that Sri, Pulikkal Thomas is deaf and dumb and incapable of looking after his affairs. During the pendency of the suit LA. No. 583/96 was filed by Thomas aforesaid for removal of the next friend. The lower Court, after conducting enquiry by order dated. 26.6.1996 allowed the petition and removed the next friend. That order is challenged by the next friend in this revision petition.

2. The revision petitioner has contended that Pulikkal Thomas is deaf and dumb and mentally retarded person incapable of looking after his affairs. A Medical certificate issued by doctor Ali who was treating him, to that effect was produced before the lower court at the time of filing the suit, by the petitioner as his next friend. According to him, the lower court without conducting a proper enquiry as provided under 0.32 R.15 CPC held that Sri. Thomas is only deaf and dumb and is capable of looking after his affairs. The respondent vehemently contended that the lower court has conducted a proper enquiry as provided under 0.32 R.15 CPC and satisfied that Sri. Thomas was capable of looking after his affairs, by questioning him in open court and that fact is evident from the impugned order itself. In the impugned order, it is stated that the enquiry was conducted in open court and to all questions put by the Court Sri. Thomas had given proper, correct and intelligent answers through gestures and signs and the lower court allowed the petition finding that Thomas is only a deaf and dumb person and not an individual incapable of looking after his affairs.

3. 0.32 R.15 CPC reads as follows :

"15. Rd to 14 (except R.2a ) to apply to persons of unsound mind-Rr.1 to!4(except R.2a ) shall, so far as may be, apply to persons adjudged, before or during the pendency of the suit, to be of unsound mind and shall also apply to persons who, though not so adjudged, are found by the Court on enquiry to be incapable, by reason of any mental infirmity, of protecting their interest when suing or being sued."

The scope of enquiry contemplated under 0.32 R.15 CPC is satisfaction of the court as to whether the person is incapable of looking after his affairs due to mental infirmity or not.

4. It is well settled that when a plaint is presented before the court by next friend, before entertaining the same the court has to prima facie satisfy that the plaintiff, due to mental infirmity, is incapable of protecting his interest. If it is contended in the suit by the opposite party that the plaintiff is not aperson suffering from any mental infirmity and is not incapable of looking after his own affairs, the court has to conduct an enquiry in that regard and has even to frame an issue regarding that aspect. In this case, from the impugned order, it is not clear as to whether any such enquiry was conducted by the Court and framed any issue in that behalf. The Court conducted an enquiry in the above petition filed by Sri. Thomas, to remove his next friend and found he is capable of looking after his affairs.

5. As already noted the scope of enquiry by the court is only for the satisfaction of the court as to whether the alleged idiot or mentally retarded person is capable of looking after his affairs. Hence, the question to be considered in this case is whether the enquiry conducted by the court below is proper and sufficient as contemplated under 0.32 R.15 CPC. It would appear from the impugned order that the lower court put

several questions to the alleged idiot or mentally retarded person in open court and he answered all those questions properly by gestures and signs being a deaf and dumb per









Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top