Sainaba vs Panayathil Hussain
2021 Latest Caselaw 17544 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN
     THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 4TH BHADRA, 1943
                            MFA NO. 62 OF 2021
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OPMH 124/2018 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT
                      COURT, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

            SAINABA, D/O.LATE PERUVAMKUZHIYIL MUHAMMED AND W/O.
            VAZHANGATTIL MUHAMMEDKUTTY MUSLIAR, AGED 73 YEARS,
            NANNAMBRA AMSOM DESOM, TIRURANGADI TALUK, MALAPPURAM
            DISTRICT.

            BY ADVS.
            C.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL
            SMT.ANJALI G.KRISHNAN
            SRI.P.ABDUL NISHAD
            SMT.RAIHANATH T.H.



RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

    1       PANAYATHIL HUSSAIN,
            AGED 55 YEARS,
            S/O. SAIDALIKUTTY, NANNAMBRA AMSOM DESOM, TIRURANGADI
            TALUK, NANNAMBRA P.O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT PIN 676 320

    2       PANAYATHIL ABDUL LATHEEF,
            AGED 49 YEARS, S/O. SAIDALIKUTTY, NANNAMBRA AMSOM
            DESOM, TIRURANGADI TALUK, NANNAMBRA P.O, MALAPPURAM
            DISTRICT, PIN 676 320

    3       PANAYATHIL ABDULLAKUTTY,
            AGED 46 YEARS
            S/O. SAIDALAIKUTTY, NANNAMBRA AMSOM DESOM, TIRURANGADI
            TALUK, NANNAMBRA P.O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 676 320


     THIS   MISC.   FIRST   APPEAL   HAVING   COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
26.08.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 MFA NO. 62 OF 2021                         2



                                    JUDGMENT

In the matter of Muhammed Shereef, aged 31

years, an application was submitted under Section 52

of the Mental Health Act,1987 for judicial

inquisition and to appoint a guardian which was

rejected by the District Judge on certain untenable

grounds which was assailed. Even without going into

the grounds raised by the learned District Judge in

the impugned order, I am of the view that the matter

will not come under the purview of Section 52 of the

Mental Health Act as there is specific exclusion

under Section 2(l) of the said Act, wherein a

mentally retarded person is specifically excluded.

The allegation in the application is that the

abovesaid person is suffering from mental

retardation. By the commencement of Mental Health

Care Act, 2017, the earlier Act - The Mental Health

Act, 1987 stood repealed with effect from 7.7.2018.

The earlier Act, which governs a mentally retarded

person - The Persons with Disabilities (Equal

opportunity Protection of Rights and Full

Participation) Act, 1995 was also repealed by the

Right of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 with

effect from 19/04/2017. Hence, without prejudice to

the right of parties to agitate the said issue as

per the lux fori and lux loci, the present appeal is

hereby dismissed.

Sd/-

P.SOMARAJAN JUDGE msp