VEMASANI NARASAMMA Vs. VEMASANI RAMA NAIDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of proceedings in the District Court of Nellore in O. P. No. 137 of 1946 which was a petition filed under Section 62, Lunacy Act, praying the Court to make an inquisition about the lunacy of one Yemasani China Rama Naidu and to adjudge him as a lunatic. The further prayers were that in case he is adjudged a lunatic, a manager to manage his estate may be appointed.

(2.) The learned District Judge after following a certain procedure about which it will be necessary to mention something hereafter, came to the conclusion that this China Rama Naidu was a lunatic and he was adjudged as such. As a result of this finding, he appointed the mother, Vemasani Narasamma, who was respondent 1 in the Court below and the appellant in this appeal, as the personal guardian of the lunatic and the Government Pleader of Nellore as the manager of the properties of the said lunatic.

(3.) Mr. T. Venkatadri appearing for the appellant, who, as stated already, is the mother of the lunatic, raises a question regarding the procedure adopted by the Court below. It arises this way: The petitioner in the lower Court, who is the contesting respondent in this appeal, is the paternal uncle's son of the lunatic and O. P. No. 137 of 1946 was filed on 24-8-1946. There are quite a large number of endorsements on the petition showing that it was returned for the rectification of mistakes and corrections of various matters and finally after various vicissitudes the defects were remedied and the petition wag represented on 28-9-1946. It came up before the learned District Judge for orders on 5-10-1946 when the learned Judge heard arguments on the maintainability and the prima facie merits of the petition and reserved orders. The learned Judge was of opinion that notice had to be given under Section 40, Lunacy Act, to the respondents in whose custody the alleged lunatic was said to be living, to produce him before the Court, and thereafter he would, if necessary, examine the lunatic and direct to District Medical Officer ab Nellore to examine him and send a report about his mental capacity and condition under Section 41. On hearing the parties further, the learned Judge would decide whether he would hold the inquisition with the aid of two or more assessors or conduct it himself. With this object in view, he issued notice to the respondents to produce the alleged lunatic in Court on 30-10-1946. This order was pronounced on 8-10-1946. On 30-10-1946, there is an endorsement that respondent l, the mother, was served in person. Respondent 2, the brother-inlaw of the alleged lunatic, was said to have refused notice. Substituted service was also ordered, but there is also the endorsement that Mr. A, H. R appears for respondent 2 and B. R. S. appears for respondent l. After a further adjournment to 18-11-1946 on which date the Judge was on casual leave, on 21-11-1946, the advocate for respondent l undertook to produce the alleged lunatic in Court on 29-11-1946. On that date the alleged lunatic was produced in Court and the Judge was of opinion that prima facie he appeared to be a person of unsound mind. Therefore he was directed to be produced before the District Medical Officer, Nellore, and the petition was adjourned to await the Medical report. Accordingly the alleged lunatic was examined by P. W. 1 and his report is to the effect that this Vemasani China Rama Naidu was incapable of acting for himself that he is to be taken care of by others both as regards his person and his property and that he can be certified as a lunatic. The doctor Vemasani Narasamma vs. Vemasani Rama Naidu and Anr. (16.03.1949 -MADHC) Page 3 of 5 gave evidence on 6-1-1947. Thereafter the parties filed documents in Court but no other oral evidence was adduced. The result was that on 23-1-1947 orders were pronounced allowing the petition in the manner as stated above by me at the outset of the judgment.