Lalit Kishore vs Meeru Sharma & Anr
- SCC(2009) 9 SCC 433
- AIRAIR 2010 SC 1240
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
A Family Court has inherent power under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure to pass an order directing a party to submit to medical examination in a matrimonial proceeding, even though the Hindu Marriage Act or other governing law contains no express provision empowering such direction, where such examination would assist the court in determining whether a party suffers from mental illness relevant to the grounds of the matrimonial proceeding, as the court's primary duty is to ensure that truth comes out and it possesses complete inherent power to pass all orders necessary to do complete justice between the parties.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Lalit Kishore ----Appellant
Versus
Meeru Sharma & Anr. ----Respondents
JUDGMENT
TARUN CHATTERJEE, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. This is an appeal filed against the judgment and
order dated 2nd of December, 2008 in W.P.No.10290
of 2007 of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at
Jabalpur by which the application filed by the
husband-appellant for medical examination of his
wife-respondent for ascertaining her mental
condition was rejected by the Family Court at
Jabalpur, which was affirmed by the High Court in
W.P.No.10290 of 2007.
2
3. In our view, the High Court as well as the Family
Court was not justified in rejecting the application
for medical examination of the wife-respondent. It
is difficult to conceive that the Family Court cannot
be conferred with jurisdiction to pass an order for
medical examination in an appropriate case because
when such report is received, that would facilitate
the court in giving a positive conclusion on the
mental condition of the wife-respondent. It is true
that the Hindu Marriage Act or any other law
governing the field does not contain any express
provision empowering the court to issue direction
upon a party in a matrimonial proceeding to compel
him to submit herself/himself to a medical
examination. But, in our view, it does not preclude
the court from passing such an order. The court is
always empowered to satisfy itself as to whether a
party before it suffers from mental illness or not
either for the purpose of taking evidence on the
ground for which the matrimonial proceeding was
started. It is well settled that the primary duty of 3
the court is to see that the truth comes out.
Therefore, although the medical examination for a
party is not provided in the Act, even then, the court
has complete inherent power in an appropriate case
under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure to
pass all orders for doing complete justice to the
parties to the suit. In Sharda vs. Dharmpal [(2003)
4 SCC 493], a three-Judge Bench decision of this
Court has taken into consideration the power of the
court to allow such application for medical
examination of a party in a matrimonial proceeding
and observed as under :-
"In certain cases medical examination by the experts in the field may not only be found to be leading to the truth of the matter but may also lead to removal of misunderstanding between the parties. It may being the parties to terms."
4. In view of the aforesaid decision of this Court and
considering the fact that the report of the medical
expert would only be an evidence in the proceeding,
we do not find any reason why such application for 4
appointment of a medical expert to examine the
wife-respondent cannot be granted.
5. For the reasons aforesaid, the impugned order as
well as the order of the Family Court are set aside.
The application for appointment of a medical expert
for medical examination of the wife-respondent filed
at the instance of the husband-appellant is thus
allowed.
6. The appeal is thus allowed. There will be no order
as to costs.
...........................J. [Tarun Chatterjee]
New Delhi; ...........................J. August 04, 2009. [R.M.Lodha]
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free