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

K.KANNAN
Ankita – Appellant
Versus
Rubal Gulati – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Sukhdeep Parmar, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Jagdish Manchanda, Advocate.

JUDGMENT (ORAL)

K. Kannan, J.—The revision is against the order directing a medical examination to be conducted on the wife on a plea by the husband that the wife is suffering from such a serious mental illness which is of incurable kind and that he cannot be expected to live with her. The petition is filed under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking for annulment of marriage by contending that the fact of mental illness had been suppressed and the petition has been filed within the time permitted by law for annulment. The Court has allowed the application despite an objection taken by the wife. The wife is not prepared to subject herself to any medical examination.

2. The counsel for the petitioner would contend that there is no scope for a judicial compulsion for medical examination. The counsel for the respondent states that the petitioner never appears in Court and she has been deliberately staying away from the Court process to prevent the Court from eliciting the best evidence which is possible. The counsel would rely on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Lalit Kishore v. Meeru Sharma and another, 2010 AIR SC 1240. that held that although the Hindu Marriage Act





Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top