Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 17504
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN
Mahalingam – Appellant
Versus
Thenmozhi Priya – Respondent
A psychiatric evaluation is a crucial factor in divorce proceedings involving allegations of mental illness, influencing the court's understanding of desertion claims.
Headnote:
Mental Health - Divorce - Act Section List - The court applied relevant provisions concerning mental health evaluations in divorce proceedings. It emphasized the necessity for psychiatric assessment to determine the validity of claims regarding a spouse's mental condition when desertion is alleged.
Fact of the Case:
A husband filed for divorce citing desertion after the couple separated. The wife countered by seeking a psychiatric evaluation of the husband, alleging he suffered from schizophrenia, which the husband denied, claiming it was a ploy to delay proceedings.
Finding of the Court:
The court found no error in directing the husband to undergo psychiatric evaluation, recognizing that such assessments are essential in determining the truth of the allegations surrounding mental health and the circumstances of the marital breakdown.
Issues: Whether the husband should be ordered to undergo a psychiatric evaluation in light of the wife's allegations of his mental illness, and if this affects the divorce proceedings based on desertion.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the determination of mental health issues is critical in divorce cases where allegations impact the grounds for divorce, thus allowing the need for a medical assessment to ensure fairness.
Final Decision: The Civil Revision Petition was dismissed, directing both parties to undergo mental health evaluations.
ORDER
The present Civil Revision Petition arises against an order passed by the learned III Additional Principal Family Judge at Chennai in I.A.No.1 of
2022 in O.P.No.52 of 2022 dated 30.09.2022.
2. There is no dispute in the relationship between the parties.
3. The civil revision petitioner is the husband and the respondent is the wife. Their marriage was solemnized on 21.02.2001 at Chennai. From the wedlock, a male child was born on 07.03.2022. Alleging that the petitioner faced cruelty and desertion, he filed a petition in H.M.O.P.No.248 of 2018 on the file of the Family Court at Karur. The said proceeding was transferred and renumbered as O.P.No.3468 of 2018 on the file of the learned III Additional Principal Family Judge at Chennai. The said transfer occurred pursuant to the orders of this Court in Tr.C.M.P.No.371 of 2018.
4. O.P.No.3468 of 2018 was withdrawn as the parties wanted to file an application for mutual consent. That petition did not fructify, according to the civil revision petitioner, since the respondent refused to grant consent for divorce. Hence, being left with no other option, the civil revision petitioner filed a fresh petition in O.P.No.52 of 2022 seeking divorce on the ground of desertion alone.
5. On being served with the summons, the respondent/wife took out an application seeking direction that the husband must present himself before the Board of Psychiatrist for psychiatric evaluation. This application was received as I.A.No.1 of 2022.
6. The allegation of the respondent/wife is that the petitioner is suffering from delusion on account of Schizophrenia, and had been taking treatment for the same from a Psychiatrist in Chennai, namely Dr.Thirunavukarasu M.D. I need not go into the details of the allegation for the purpose of disposal of the revision other than stating the specific allegation of the wife which is pertinent to this issue. She wants the husband to be treated for Schizophrenia, which according to her, though long term will bear fruits within a decade.
7. The civil revision petitioner was served with the petition, and he filed a counter stating that he is not suffering from any illness. He would take a stand that it was at the instance of the wife he took treatment from Dr.Thirunavukarasu M.D, and the said Doctor had given malmedication, and that itself cannot be a ground to refer him to a Medical Board. He would allege that the respondent herein, who is a Medical Doctor herself, had not treated him properly, and she had filed the petition only as a ruse to drag on the matter.
8. After hearing both sides, the learned trial Judge came to the conclusion that without receiving a report from the authority, namely the panel of Psychiatrists, she cannot decide on the petition. Consequently, she directed the medical examination of the respondent/husband to be conducted by the Board of experts to be formed by the Dean, Kilpauk Medical College and Hospital, Kilpauk. Against which, the present revision has been presented before this Court.
9. Heard Mr.M.Arun, appearing on behalf of the civil revision petitioner and Ms.P.Srividhya, appearing on behalf of the respondent.
10. The main divorce petition has been filed on the ground of desertion by the wife. The factum that the husband and the wife have separated is not in controversy. If the husband is able to prove that the wife is staying away without a reasonable cause and other circumstances that he has pleaded in the petition, he would be entitled to a decree. On the contrary, if the wife is able to prove that she has a reasonable cause for staying away from the husband, which could possibly include the allegations of delusion, the wife cannot be found to be at fault. As rightly pointed out by the learned trial Judge, these are matters which have to be dealt with at the time of trial.
11. The point remains that the civil revision petitioner has admitted to the fact that he was taking treatment from one Dr.Thirunavukarasu M.D, who is an expert in Psychiatry
