Assessment Of Mental Status Of Applicant Not Necessary To Decide The Question Of Maintenance: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court has held that it is not necessary to access the mental status of an applicant who has sought maintenance.

The Court was considering a Petition against an order of the Family Court directing the Petitioners to undergo a medical check-up in maintenance claim issue.

The single bench of Justice A. Badharudheen observed, "....It is strange to note that the petitioners approached the family court claiming maintenance for their survival, alleging that they did not have any means of survival. In such a case, merely acting on the report of the counsellor, when a petition was led by the respondent, the petitioners’ medical board examination was ordered by the family court to ascertain their mental status. What is the purpose for getting such a report is not at all discernible. Even the respondent who resided along with the petitioners did not doubt the mental status of the petitioners before the counsellor’s report. In a proceedings for maintenance, there is no purpose in referring the petitioners for assessing their mental status to decide the question of maintenance."

The Petitioner was represented by Advocate K. Mohanakannan while the Respondent was represented by Advocate T.M. Raman Kartha.

Facts of the Case

The Petitioners herein, wife and minor child of the Respondent, led application for maintenance before the Family Court during the pendency of which the court referred the parties for counselling. The Counsellor reported some symptoms of mental health to the Petitioners. Subsequently, the Family Court directed for the medical checkup of the Petitioners before the Medical Board.

Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that in a Petition led for maintenance medical examination of the petitioners is unwarranted, and the consideration of the court is only whether the petitioners are having means of sustenance and the capability of the respondent to repay the same

On the other hand, Counsel for the Respondent submitted that the Respondent is ready to take back the wife and the child and to maintain them, but they are not amenable for the same.

Reasoning By Court

The Court at the outset noted that the question for its consideration was as to whether a medical examination of the petitioners, merely based on suspected symptoms of mental health issues, is necessary in a proceedings claiming maintenance?

It observed that in a proceedings for maintenance, the point of consideration is; whether the petitioners are having means of maintenance by themselves, and the respondent is having the legal obligation, capacity, and income to maintain the claimants.

The Court went on to hold that the impugned order as unnecessary.

Cause Title: Binsi vs. Sandeep Chandran (2025:KER:37281)

Click here to read/ download Order