PROMODE KUMAR PAUL Vs. PRATIMA RANI PAUL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The judgment of the Court was as follows :- This revisional application is directed against Order No. 76 dated 11 June, 1999 passed by the Learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Seventh Court at Alipore in Title Suit No. 157 of 1987 (Smt. Mira Pal & Ors. v. Promode Kumar Paul and Ors.).

(2.) The petitioner is defendant No. 1 of the suit and has come up as against that order. The grievance made is that O.P. No. 5 Smt. Maya Samajpati wife of Sri Tapan Samajpati is stated to be a person of unsound mind and that learned Court below illegally exercised its jurisdiction by allowing the petition under Order 32 Rule 4 of the Civil Procedure Code without considering the other defects in the written statement and so on.

(3.) It has been submitted that without taking recourse of the provisions of Section 71 of the Indian Lunacy Act, 1912 since repelled and substituted by Mental Health Act, 1987, recourse under Order 32 Rule 4 be not taken. In course of hearing of this revision petition Mr. Sahu learned Lawyer for the petitioner has urged that the cumulative effect of Order Nos. 74 and 76 on two different dates passed by the learned Court below is quite irregular/ illegal and be not allowed to remain on the grounds that: 1) without taking recourse of the provisions of Section 71 of the Indian Lunacy Act, 1912 and/or the Guardians Act adherence to Order 32 is bad. 2) transposition of the opposite parties (defendants 2 to 7 in the suit itself) be not allowed to stand unless they withdraw their written statement filed before them.