the High Court dismissed a civil revision petition challenging the trial court's rejection of an application to examine the petitioner to prove her virginity, holding that the rejection was correct where she had already admitted to consummation of marriage in her pleadings.
The order of the trial court rejecting the application for medical examination is confirmed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 24.02.2017
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
C.R.P.(PD).No.87 of 2014
and M.P.No.1 of 2014
P.Gayathiri ... Petitioner
Vs.
L.Rajendran
... Respondent
Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the fair and decreetal order dated 03.12.2013 made in I.A.No.140 of 2013 in H.M.O.P.No.311 of 2012 on the file of the II Additional Sub Court, Erode, Erode District.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Dhanasekaran
For Respondent : Mr.E.P.Senniyangiri
The revision petitioner has filed H.M.O.P.No.311 of 2012 seeking for dissolution of marriage under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Subordinate Court, Erode.
2.During the pendency of the said petition, an application in I.A.No.140 of 2013 was filed by the revision petitioner with a prayer to examine the petitioner by an expert Doctor to prove her virginity. The trial Court rejected the petition on the ground that in the Original Petition filed by the revision petitioner, she has not refused the consummation of marriage between the petitioner and the respondent. Further, in her evidence also the revision petitioner admitted that the marriage was consummated. Such being the statement made in the Original Petition and in the deposition, the trial Court has rejected the petition for medical examination.
3.The revision petitioner cannot file such a petition seeking for medical examination after making a specific pleading and deposition. Such petitions being filed to suit the
convenience of the parties has to be deprecated. In the case on hand, it is a case of divorce and the allegations and counter allegations are already set out in the Original Petition and the respective parties have to prove their cases before the trial Court by producing oral and documentary evidences and filing a petition seeking for examination by a Doctor cannot be entertained, more specifically when there is a specific pleading by the respective parties. Hence, the rejection of the application by the trial Court is in accordance with law and there is no infirmity in the order of the trial Court.
Sd/-
Asst.Registrar (CS III )
/true copy/
Sub Asst. Registrar
To
1.The II Additional Sub Court, Erode, Erode District.
C.R.P.(PD).No.87 of 2014 and M.P.No.1 of 2014
RSI(CO) VR(13/03/2017)
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a trial court acted within its discretion by rejecting an application for medical examination to prove virginity when the petitioner had previously admitted to consummation of marriage.
Whether the rejection of an application filed after the stage of evidence contravened the law of natural justice.
Whether the order deleting the order of the learned family court should be set aside or permitted to be sustained in the light of onus of the petitioner.
P.Gayathiri
L.Rajendran
S.M.Subramaniam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
