POLAVARAPU VENKATASWARLU Vs. POLAVARAPU SUBBAYYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appln. out of which the civil revn. petn. arises is one Under Section 151, Civil P. C. The controversy between the parties to the original suit in which the appln. was filed is as to the legitimacy of the pltf. which the deft. the alleged lather, is disputing. The suit is one for partition.

(2.) The deft. applied Under Section 151, Civil P. C. for a direction from the Ct. to the pltf. & his mother, his next friend, to appear in person before the Ct. in order to enable a medical expert to take samples of their blood. The learned Judge below has ordered the appln. in these terms :

(3.) I am clear that in both these contentions the learned counsel is correct. Section 151, Civil P. C., has been introduced into the statute book to give effect to the inherent powers of Cts. as expounded by Woodroffe J. in Hukumchand Baid v. Kamla Nand, 83 Cal. 927 at p. 931 & 932. Such powers can only be exercised ex debito justitiae & not on the mere invocation of parties or on the mere volition of Cts. There is no procedure either in the Civil P. C. or in the Indian Evidence Act which provides for a test of the kind sought to be taken by the deft. in the present case. It is said by Mr. Ramakrishna for the resp. before me that in England this sort of test is resorted to by Cts. where the question of non-access in connection with an issue of legitimacy arises for consideration. My attention has been drawn by learned counsel to p. 69 of Taylor's Principles and Practice of Medical Jurisprudence, Vol. 2, where it ia stated thus: