Site icon Legal Vidhiya

DEEP MUKERJEE VERSUS SREYASHI BANERJEE

Admin
Spread the love

CASE DETAILS

CASE NAME: Deep Mukerjee v. Sreyashi Banerjee 

CITATION: 2024 INSC 274

DATE OF JUDGEMENT: 5th April 2024

COURT: Supreme Court 

JURISDICTION: Civil Appellate Jurisdiction

APPELLANT: Deep Mukerjee

RESPONDENT: Sreyashi Banerjee

BENCH: Divisional Bench [Justice Vikram Nath & Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra]

INTRODUCTION

In Deep Mukerjee v. Sreyashi Banerjee, a Special Leave Petition is filed before The Supreme Court of India against the order passed by the High Court which set aside the Trial Court order as well as stated that even though the appellant is willing to undergo the potentiality test it is not allowed and also respondent/wife is not compelled for the fertility test and mental health check-up. The couple were residing together for several years but due to some dispute arise the respondent filed an application under Hindu Marriage Act,1955 to seeking divorce on the ground that the marriage is not consummated due to impotency of the appellant. This Court granted the Special Leave Petition and held that the respondent is not compelled for fertility test and the appellant is allowed to undergo potentiality test when there is no cogent reason to stop him.

LAW INVOLVED:

  1. Section 9 of The Hindu Marriage Act,1955: Restitution of Conjugal Right
  2. Section 13(1)(ia) of The Hindu Marriage Act,1955: Divorce
  3. Section 45 of The Indian Evidence Act,1872: Opinions of Experts
  4. Section 151 of The Civil Procedure Code,1908: Saving of Inherent Powers of Court

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

  1. The Appellant/husband and the Respondent/wife were married on 23rd July 2013 at Chennai. They moved to the United Kingdom where they stayed together for 7 ½ years. After returning to India both reside together in the respondent/wife’s father’s residential property. The dispute arose between the party, resulting in them separated in April 2021. It was alleged by the appellant that since then the respondent neither joined his company nor responded to any communication/message made by the appellant. 
  2. The appellant filed an application before Additional Principal Family Court under Section 9 of The Hindu Marriage Act,1955 for the Restitution of Conjugal Rights. On the other hand, the Respondent filed an application under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 for seeking decree of Divorce. The ground of divorce made by respondent is that the marriage between the respondent and appellant is not consummated because of the impotency of the Appellant/husband.  
  3. The appellant further filed an Interim application under Section 45 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 read with Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code,1908. For the potential test of the appellant and the respondent’s fertility test and psychological/mental health test of both.
  4. The Trial Court allowed the interim application and order for the test prayed in the interim application and also stated that the test was conducted under the supervision of the competent medical board constituted by the Dean of Rajiv Gandhi Government General Hospital, Chennai as well as the report sent to court through Advocate Commissioner under the sealed cover. Further, the trial court directed both parties to maintain secrecy and not revealed the result of the medical report. 
  5. The Trial Court Order was challenged by the Respondent in the High Court. The High Court allowed the Revision Petition and set aside the Trial Court Order. 
  6. The Appellant challenged the High Court order in the Supreme Court through filing a Special Leave Petition. The matter is before the Supreme Court now.

ISSUE FRAMED BEFORE SUPREME COURT

If, the Appellant willingly undergo potentiality test whether the High Court is correct to not upheld the Trial Court Order?

Whether a woman is compelled by Court/law to undergo the fertility test?

Whether the High Court order is going to be set aside or upheld?

CONTENTION BY THE APPELLANTS

  1. The learned Senior Counsel argued that when the appellant willingly undergo potentiality test the High Court has no reason to set aside the order. 
  2. The learned Senior counsel rely upon “Sharda vs. Dharmpal” (2003) 4 SCC 493. The case is related to the medical examination of the parties to resolve the matrimonial disputes. The issue arise in this case is that ‘Whether the matrimonial Court has power under Section 151, CPC to direct the parties to undergo the medical test?’. The Supreme Court held that even though no direct power to matrimonial court in this regard is given but by virtue of the Section 151 of CPC the Court has power to direct, to ensure complete justice to the parties in dispute and such power is only used when there is a prima facie case in favour of applicant as well as the court has sufficient reason for the same. The Court has to balance between the Individual dignity and the privacy with ensuring Justice.

CONTENTION BY THE RESPONDENT

  1. The learned Senior Counsel argued that the respondent is not compelled to undergo the fertility and medical check up when respondent/wife unwilling to do so.

REASONING OF THE SUPREME COURT

  1. The High Court has not given any reasonable reason to not allow the appellant for the potentiality test. 
  2. The High Court focused upon the conduct of the parties which are not essential for resolving the issue. 
  3. The appellant is willingly undergoing a potentiality test then the court should not stop him to not to do so.
  4. The woman/respondent is not compelled to undergoing the fertility test against her will. 

DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case the Court stated that if the appellant willingly undergo potentiality test and the High Court does not have any cogent reason, the appellant is allowed to undergo the potentiality test. The Court further directed to do the test within four weeks and the report must be submitted within two weeks thereafter. The test was held according to the order given by the Trial Court. The Court upheld the Trial Court order and modifies the High Court order to such extent which allow appellant for the potentiality test. It also held that the respondent/wife is not compelled for fertility test/medical health check-up. The leave is granted. 

ANALYSIS

The Supreme Court relied upon the Sharda case(supra) to allow the appellant for the potentiality test upon his willingness and not to compel the respondent for fertility test as compulsion of this is against the Principles of Natural Justice. The reasoning behind this court to set aside the High Court order to such an extent is to ensure justice which is the paramount objective of the law and order in society. The court also held that the appellant is stopped for the potentiality test if there is any cogent reason. Hence, The Court granted the Special Leave Petition.

CONCLUSION

While concluding this case the Supreme Court set aside the High Court order in such an extent which violates the Principle of Natural Justice, Equity and Good Conscience. The appellant is allowed to go for a potentiality test on one hand and on other hand the Respondent is not compelled for the fertility test and the mental health check-up. This maintains the individual dignity as well as privacy. 

REFERENCES 

  1. https://main.sci.gov.in
  2. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/182644442/
  3. https://www.scconline.com/

This Article is written by Sweety student of Law Center-1, Delhi University; Intern at Legal Vidhiya.

Disclaimer: The materials provided herein are intended solely for informational purposes. Accessing or using the site or the materials does not establish an attorney-client relationship. The information presented on this site is not to be construed as legal or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon for such purposes or used as a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney in your state. Additionally, the viewpoint presented by the author is of a personal nature.

PDF 📄
Exit mobile version