IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRDESH:: HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT:: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY C.R.P.No.5352 OF 2006 Between: Gullapalli Veeren Chakravarthi and two others …Petitioners A n d Rayapati Srinivasa Rao ..Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY C.R.P.No.5352 OF 2006 ORDER: This civil revision petition is directed against the order dated 20-04-2006 in I.A.No.1475 of 2005 in P.O.P.No.160 of 2004, on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Guntur, wherein the said application filed by the petitioners herein under Section 151 CPC seeking a direction that the respondent-petitioner and his power of attorney agent shall undergo medical check up before a medical board to know their mental capacity, was dismissed. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the respondent. Perused the record. 3. The respondent herein filed O.P in forma pauperis as the power of attorney holder of her husband. According to the petitioners-respondents, the respondent- petitioner and his wife both are not mentally capable and one Rayapati Nageswara Rao, who is cousin of the respondent-petitioner, is behind the litigation and is trying to grab the property which is managed by the first petitioner herein by virtue of a Will executed by Rayapati Veeraiah, the grandfather of the first petitioner. The respondent-petitioner is son of Rayapati Veeraiah and maternal uncle of the first petitioner. According to the petitioners, the first petitioner was appointed as guardian under the Will dated 05-03-1999 executed by his grandfather Veeraiah, as the respondent and his brother Prasad are both mentally ill. He alleges that one Rayapati Nageswara Rao, who is son of Veeraiah’s brother has brought into existence a fabricated Will dated 12-10-2001 forging the signatures of Rayapati Veeraiah and instigated the respondent herein to file the suit based on the said Will. 4. The petitioners filed I.A.No.1475 of 2005 seeking a direction to the respondent-petitioner and his GPA holder, the wife, both to undergo medical check up alleging that they are mentally unsound. The respondent-petitioner filed a counter opposing the application and contending that the respondent is only physically handicapped, but is mentally sound and that he is capable of walking with the assistance of others and can speak but with jerks and halts and is worldly wise and is capable of distinguishing between right and wrong. The respondent-petitioner further alleges that the petitioners have fabricated the Will dated 05-03-1999 forging the signature of Veeraiah with a view to grab the properties of the respondent by branding the respondent and his wife as mentally unsound. 5. The scope of enquiry in the present proceedings is very limited and confined to the question as to whether the respondent-petitioner and his wife, the GPA holder, are liable to undergo medical check up. A perusal of the impugned order would disclose that the learned Senior Civil Judge, Guntur has personally questioned the respondent and his wife and found that the respondent is speaking with jerks and halts in a normal way and the guardian of the respondent is speaking fluently and worldly wise. The learned Senior Civil Judge, therefore, felt that it is neither good nor reasonable to refer the respondent and his wife for medical check up to assess their mental capacity. As seen from the impugned order, the respondent-petitioner is having only physical disability impairing his speech partially, but not any mental disability and further his wife, the GPA holder, is mentally sound and worldly wise. There is absolutely no reason or justification to differ with the above said observations recorded by the learned Senior Civil Judge on the basis of the personal and direct interaction with the parties in the Court. A person cannot be referred to medical board for examination of his mental capacities just because the same is demanded by the other party. Except making a bald allegation that the respondent and his wife are mentally unsound, the petitioners herein have not placed any material before the Court to prima facie show that the respondent and his wife are both mentally unsound and, therefore, they cannot prosecute the proceedings on their own. In the absence of any such material and in view of the personal examination of the respondent and his wife by the Court below to assess their mental capacities and in view of the satisfaction recorded by the Court below that respondent and his wife are not mentally disabled, it is considered that the impugned order, dismissing the application filed by the petitioners herein, does not call for any interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction of this Court. 6. In the result, the civil revision petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 01st March, 2011 Lrkm.