HANUMAPPA Vs. YALLAKKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts leading up to this petition are stated to be as follows:

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the court below has allowed the above application without regard to the serious and sensitive nature of the proposed investigation, which is a direct violation of the petitioner's fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It is contended that the plaintiffs, who are claiming to be the wife and daughters of the petitioner are aged 48, 24 and 22, respectively, and it is hence inexplicable that they were unable to produce any kind of documentary evidence to even remotely establish that the petitioner and the first plaintiff had lived together as husband and wife, over the decades and that the other plaintiffs were born to them. It is therefore unjust and objectionable that the petitioner be subjected to any scientific investigation, against his will and when the respondents 1 to 3 have miserably failed to establish their case. It is contended that it is not a circumstance that though there was some evidence of a possible relationship, since there was some doubt created in the mind of the court, which had prompted it to make the appointment, and seeks that the impugned order be set at naught.

(3.) The learned counsel for the respondents, however, seeks to justify the impugned order.