IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.12554/2015 (GM-FC) BETWEEN:
MR.YOGISH KHODE, S/O MR.RAJAGOPALACHAR, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, NOW R/AT 10876, NORTHRIDGE SQUARE, CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA, USA – 950 14.
PERMANENT R/O “SHREYAS”, 684, 11TH A MAIN, 5TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 041. …PETITIONER (BY SRI.RAVISHANKAR D.R., ADVOCATE – ABSENT) AND:
MRS.RASHMI MADHAVA, W/O MRS.YOGISH KODE, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/AT 217, 3RD CROSS, “SOUDHAMINI”, KALAYANA MANTAP ROAD, KONANAKUNTE, BANGALORE – 560 062. …RESPONDENT (BY SMT./MS. BEENA P.K., ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDERS AT ANNEXURE – E DATED 12.03.2015 PASSED IN M.C.NO.2397/2006 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDL. FAMILY JUDGE AT BANGALORE AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R None for the parties. Perused the records.
2. The writ petition is admitted for hearing.
3. In this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the validity of the order dated 20.03.2015, by which the application filed by the petitioner under Order VI Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 read with Sections 10 and 16 of the Family Courts Act, seeking issuance of summons to the Head of Psychiatry, Additional Professor of Psychiatry and for production of documents relating to the treatment given to the petitioner, has been rejected.
4. The aforesaid application was made at the stage when the proceedings before the Court were fixed for final arguments.
5. A bench of this Court while entertaining the writ petition has granted an ad-interim order on 31.03.2015 by which the proceedings before the Family Court were stayed.
6. In view of the aforesaid interim order, proceedings before the family Court have been stayed. From the perusal of the records, the application preferred by the petitioner has been rejected on the ground that the respondent has not given details about the inpatient number, date of admission, date of discharge, OPD number, date of treatment, etc., and the application was vague. The order passed by the Family Court suffers from neither any jurisdictional infirmity nor any error apparent on the face of the record warranting interference by this Court in exercise of the powers under article 227 of the Constitution of India. Even otherwise, it is well settled in law that the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution cannot be exercised to correct all errors of a judgment of a Court acting within its limitation. It can be exercised where the order is passed in grave dereliction of duty or in flagrant abuse of fundamental principles of law and justice. [See: ‘JAI SINGH AND OTHERS VS. M.C.D. AND OTHERS’, (2010) 9 SCC 385, ‘SHALINI SHYAM SHETTY VS. RAJENDRA SHANKAR PATIL’, (2010) 8 SCC 329 and ‘RADHE SHYAM AND ANOTHER VS. CHABBI NATH AND OTHERS’, (2015) 5 SCC 423]. In the instant case, the impugned order is not passed in violation of fundamental principles of law and justice warranting interference of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution.
7. In view of the aforesaid enunciation of law and in the facts of the case, I do not find any ground to interfere with the order dated 20.03.2015 which has been impugned in this petition.
Accordingly, the writ petition is hereby dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE VP