SHAILENDRA KUMAR SHUKLA Vs. AARTI BAJPAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the legality and validity of the order dtd. 5/7/2024 passed by the District Judge Bastar at Jagdalpur (C.G.) in Civil Suit No.5A/2017, whereby, an application under Order 32 Rule 15 of the Code of Civil Procedure preferred by the next friend (daughter of Respondent No.1) to pursue the Suit because her mother is suffering from mental infirmity, was allowed.

(2.) Necessary facts for adjudication of the present petition are that earlier, the petitioner had also filed a writ petition viz WP(227) No.367/2020 before this Court challenging the order dtd. 21/1/2020 passed in Civil Suit No.5A/2017 by the 3rd Additional District Judge Bastar at Jagdalpur (C.G.), by which the application filed by the daughter of the Plaintiff/Respondent No.1 has been allowed and she has been permitted to represent the plaintiff in the Civil Suit. The said Writ Petition was dispose of vide order dtd. 19/6/2020 by observing that as no enquiry was done as it is provided under Order 32 Rule 15 of the CPC, so the suitable order may be passed in that respect after making an enquiry. After such order, the learned trial Court has made an enquiry and passed the impugned order. Hence, this petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the findings arrived at by the trial Court is not justified. Plaintiff is not of unsound mind even she had filed a Civil Suit No.226A/2013, for declaration of death of her husband before the Civil Court, Raipur and she had also passed Class 10 thin the year 2015 from open school. He lastly submits that statement of Dr. Vatsala Mariyam, Psychiatrist was not properly appreciated. Therefore, considering all these aspects, the impugned order is not sustainable and he prays to allow the petition.