Civil Revision Petition filed to set aside an order rejecting an application to appoint the husband as a guardian. The High Court dismissed the petition, holding the lower court correctly found the respondent competent to contest the case.
Civil Revision Petition dismissed as devoid of merits. No costs.
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.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 08.06.2017
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI
C.R.P.(PD)No.1826 of 2014 and M.P.No. 1 of 2014
Palani .. Petitioner
Vs.
Jayapallavi Rep.by Father, natural guardian and next friend
Mr. Shanmugam .. Respondent
PRAYER: This Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set-aside the Fair and Decretal order dated 03.12.2013 passed in I.A.No.123/2012 in H.M.O.P.No. 259/2012, on the file of the Sub Court, Poonamalee.
For Petitioner : Mr. M. Velmurugan
ORDER
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner represented
that he has given change of vakalat. Hence this Court decides the matter based on the merits of the case.
2
the fair and decretal order dated 03.12.2013 passed in I.A.No.123/2012 in H.M.O.P.No. 259/2012, on the file of the Sub Court, Poonamalee.
3
litigation and substantiate her case. On the other hand, the respondent was examined by competent Doctor and based on the Doctor's Certificate, the learned Judge dismissed the application holding that the respondent is competent person to contest the case and hence, the application was dismissed as devoid of merits.
devoid of merits. No Costs. Consequently the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
08.06.2017
Index : Yes speaking order/non speaking order jv
4
V.M.VELUMANI, J.
jv
To The Sub Judge, Poonamalee.
C.R.P.(PD)No.1826 of 2014 and M.P.No. 1 of 2014
08.06.2017
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appointment of the respondent's father as guardian was necessary as the respondent was alleged to be mentally retarded.
Whether the lower court's order dismissing the application was illegal or irregular warranting interference under Article 227.
Palani
Jayapallavi
V.M.Veluman
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
