Disposed¶18

Sarathchandra Santhan and Anr. v. Federal Bank Represented by Its Authorised Officer of Federal Bank and Ors.

Bombay HC11 Mar 2025WP/2330/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

parens patriae; legal guardian appointment; vegetative state patient; Medical Board feasibility; Alleppey Kerala residence; jurisdictional referral Bombay HC to Kerala HC; contentions kept open; no costs; Writ Petition 2330 of 2025; Kulkarni & Sethna JJ; Mayuresh Dipak Nadkarni v Union of India referred.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief; petition disposed of with all contentions of the petitioners (including any grievances of Mrs. Resmi Santhan against the respondents) kept open, and liberty to approach the Court of appropriate jurisdiction (High Court of Kerala); no costs. ¶18

Sarathchandra Santhan and Anr. vs Federal Bank Represented by Its Authorised Officer of Federal Bank and Ors. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶18

Issue for consideration

Whether, invoking the doctrine of parens patriae, petitioner no.1 should be appointed as the legal guardian of his mother, Mrs. Resmi Santhan, who is stated to be in a vegetative state and resides at Alleppey, Kerala.

¶11

Court's answer

It may not be possible for this Court to appoint a Medical Board from a Government Hospital in Mumbai, who would visit Kerala to examine the medical condition of Mrs. Resmi Santhan.

¶15

Ratio / Principle

It is thus appropriate that the petitioners approach the High Court of Judicature at Kerala by filing the appropriate proceedings of the nature before this Court and seek such reliefs as may be permissible in law.

¶15

Key takeaways

In view of the above, the petition is disposed of, keeping open all contentions of the petitioners to approach the Court of appropriate jurisdiction.ratio¶16
If Mrs. Resmi Santhan herself has any grievances/issues/disputes with the respondents in the present petition, those contentions are also expressly kept open.obiter¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Parens patriae / Guardianship — Writ Petition No. 2330 of 2025, High Court of Bombay (G. S. Kulkarni & Advait M. Sethna, JJ.), disposed of on 04 April 2025. Petitioner no.1 sought appointment as legal guardian of his mother, Mrs. Resmi Santhan, stated to be in a vegetative state and residing at Alleppey, Kerala. Observing that it may not be possible to appoint a Medical Board from a Government Hospital in Mumbai to travel to Kerala for examination, the Court held it appropriate for the petitioners to approach the High Court of Kerala by filing appropriate proceedings. Petition disposed of keeping open all contentions, including any grievances of Mrs. Resmi Santhan against the respondents. No costs. Refers to Mayuresh Dipak Nadkarni vs. Union of India, W.P.(L.) No. 140 of 2024 (Bom HC DB).

¶1

PRAJAKTASAGAR Digitallysigned byPRAJAKTASAGARVARTAK VARTAK Date:2025.04.0712:59:00+0530

¶2

906-wp 2330-25.doc

¶3

Prajakta Vartak

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 2330 OF 2025

¶6

Sarathchandra Santhan & Anr. ...Petitioners Versus Federal Bank & Ors. ...Respondents

¶7

Ms. Sneha Shaji for the Petitioners. Mr. Ashutosh Gavnekar i/b. Mr. C. G. Gavnekar for Respondent No.2.

¶8

CORAM : G. S. KULKARNI & ADVAIT M. SETHNA, JJ. DATE : 04 APRIL 2025

¶9

P.C.:

¶10

This petition has espoused the jurisdiction of this Court invoking the doctrine of parens patriae. The position in law in this regard has been considered by the Division Bench of this Court in Mayuresh Dipak Nadkarni vs. Union of India 1.

¶11

The prayer in the petition is that petitioner no.1 be appointed as the legal guardian of Mrs. Resmi Santhan who is the mother of petitioner no.1 and who is stated to be in vegetative state. She is stated to be residing at Alleppey, Kerala. To consider such prayer, the Court would be required to appoint a Medical Board to visit the residence of Mrs. Resmi Santhan. It

¶12

1 Writ Petition (L.) No. 140 of 2024 dated 12 January 2024

¶13

Page 1 of 2 04 April 2025

¶14

906-wp 2330-25.doc

¶15

may not be possible for this Court to appoint a Medical Board from a Government Hospital in Mumbai, who would visit Kerala to examine the medical condition of Mrs. Resmi Santhan. It is thus appropriate that the petitioners approach the High Court of Judicature at Kerala by filing the appropriate proceedings of the nature before us and seek appropriate reliefs as may be permissible in law.

¶16

In this view of the matter, we dispose of this petition keeping open

¶17

all contentions of the petitioners to approach the Court of appropriate jurisdiction.

¶18

Disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No costs.

¶19

Needless to observe that if Mrs. Resmi Santhan has any grievances/issues/disputes with the respondents in the present petition, the contentions in that regard are also expressly kept open.

¶20

[ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.] [G. S. KULKARNI, J.]

¶21

Page 2 of 2 04 April 2025

Sarathchandra Santhan and Anr. v. Federal Bank Represented by Its Authorised Officer of Federal Bank and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarathchandra Santhan and Anr. v. Federal Bank Represented by Its Authorised Officer of Federal Bank and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sanjay Govind Sawant and Ors. vs Mumbai International Airport Ltd.

Ms Prabhu Packaging Industries Thr. Its Managing Partner Mr. T.S. Madhusudhan vs the Sub Registrar

Captain Mahesh M Murlidhar vs Union of India Throu. the Sec. Ministry of Defence and Ors.

Lionbridge Technologies LLP 2013 14 vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 15(1)(2) Mumbai

Lionbridge Technologies LLP vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 15(1)(2) Mumbai

Suresh Satyawan Sarode vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Its Secretary Transport Department and Ors.