THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5810 OF 2010 Dated: 21.06.2011 Between : 1. Ketanapalli Subba Lakshmi and another.… Petitioners And Nalluri Veerabrahmanandam … Respondent THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.5810 OF 2010 ORDER : This Civil Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 14.07.2010 in I.A.No.700 of 2007 in O.S.No.252 of 2006 on the file of the Court of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur. The defendants are the revision petitioners. The suit is filed by one Nalluri Krishnaveni, represented by her husband and natural guardian Nalluri Veera Brahmanandam claiming that the plaintiff is deaf and dumb and of unsound mind. The defendant No.2 is grandmother of the plaintiff-Krishnaveni and the defendant No.1 is the daughter of the defendant No.2. The suit is filed seeking a declaration that the Settlement deed, dated 19.06.2002 executed by the plaintiff -Krishnaveni in favour of the defendant No.1 is null and void as the plaintiff is of unsound mind and for consequential reliefs. The defendants contested the suit and also filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 (d) of C.P.C. to reject the plaint on the ground that no petition was filed in compliance with the mandatory provisions of Order 32 Rule 15 of C.P.C. seeking leave of the Court. Pending the said application, Nalluri Veera Brahmanandam filed I.A.No.700 of 2007 to permit him to act as guardian and next friend to the plaintiff Nalluri Krishnaveni. In the affidavit filed in support of the application, it was pleaded that Nalluri Krishnaveni was deaf and dumb by birth and she was also of unsound mind and therefore he had been looking after her welfare. It was also pleaded that the plaint schedule property was the absolute property of Krishnaveni and the same had been in her possession and enjoyment. The defendants/revision petitioners opposed I.A.No.700 of 2007 contending that Nalluri Veera Brahmanandam was not the guardian of the plaintiff and that there was no marital relationship between them. It was also claimed that the defendants had been taking care of Smt. Krishnaveni and that she had been staying with the defendants in their house. It was alleged that in fact Nalluri Veera Brahmanandam had married another woman by name Sujatha and he never treated Krishaveni as his wife. It was also pleaded that though Krishnaveni was deaf and dumb, she was not of unsound mind. The plaintiff Krishnaveni was produced before the Court and she was sought to be examined as P.W.1. However she could not even take oath as she was deaf and dumb and therefore her evidence could not be recorded. Subsequently Ex.A-1 medical certificate dated 5.3.2008 issued by the District Hospital, Rajahmundry, was filed before the Court and the plaintiff was again produced in the court on 15.7.2009. The Court also found that she was deaf and dumb and after hearing both sides she was sent to the Government Hospital, Visakhapatnam to ascertain her mental capacity. The Associate Professor of Psychiatry, Government Hospital for Medical Care, Visakhapatnam, who examined the plaintiff deposed as P.W.1 and stated that the plaintiff was under observation for 15 days and it was found that she was not in a position to take care of her affairs and that her I.Q. was 39 which indicated moderate mental retardation. The Certificate, dated 14.12.2009 issued by the Superintendent of the Hospital K. Narasimha Reddy was marked as Ex.X-1 and the original record maintained in the hospital, on the basis of which Ex.X-1 was issued was also produced by P.W.1. It was deposed by P.W.1 that in spite of communication sent to the defendants, they did not appear at the time of examination of the plaintiff and therefore she was examined in the presence of Nalluri Veera Brahmanandam and one Vijaya Lakshmi on 30.11.2009. It was also found by the Court below that the Superintendent of the Hospital addressed a letter to the Court on 18.11.2009 requesting to inform the parties to attend their O.P. Department on 30.11.2009 before the Chief of First Unit and the same was communicated to the respective counsel as per the endorsements made thereon. On the basis of the evidence of P.W.1 and Ex.X1 Certificate, the Court below recorded a prima facie finding that Smt. Krishnaveni was of unsound mind and that she was not able to protect her interest. So far as the contention of the respondents that she was not staying with her husband Nalluri Veera Brahmanandam is concerned, the Court below found that the marriage between Krishnaveni and Brahamanandam was subsisting and there was no material to show that Brahmanandam had neglected the welfare of his wife Krishnaveni. Accordingly, I.A.No.700 of 2007 was allowed and Nalluri Veera Brahmanandam was permitted to act as guardian and next friend of Nalluri Krishnaveni to proceed with the suit. Aggrieved by the same, the present Civil Revision Petition is filed by the defendants. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties. At the outset, it is to be noticed that the fact that the plaintiff Krishnaveni is deaf and dumb is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that she was married to Nalluri Veera Brahmanandam. Admittedly the marriage is subsisting. The plaintiff Krishnaveni was produced before the Court and having observed her inability to give evidence, she was sent for medical examination. The Doctor who examined her deposed as P.W.1 and the Certificate issued on the basis of the original record maintained in the hospital was marked as Ex.X-1. On the basis of the said evidence, the Court below recorded a finding that the plaintiff Krishnaveni was not in a position to take care of her affairs. Hence her husband who is of sound mind is competent to act as guardian and next friend for filing the suit. Though it was alleged by the respondent that the husband of the plaintiff Krishnaveni was not interested in her welfare, the same could not be established. The plea of the defendants that the plaintiff Krsihnaveni is only deaf and dumb and that she is capable of taking care for herself was rightly disbelieved by the Court below in the light of the evidence of P.W.1 coupled with Ex.X-1 Certificate. On appreciation of the evidence available on record, the Court below has also recorded a finding that the plaintiff Krishnaveni is in the custody of her husband Nalluri Veera Brahmanandam. Having heard the learned counsel for both parties, I do not find any justifiable reason to interfere with the above said findings of fact recorded by the Court below. Consequently, the conclusion of the Court below that the plaintiff’s husband Nalluri Veera Brahmanandam is a fit person to act as her guardian and to prosecute the suit on her behalf cannot be held to be erroneous on any ground whatsoever. For the aforesaid reasons, the order under Revision warrants no interference by this Court. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs. _____________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 21.06.2011 gbs