Advocate with crores mentally ill, his nephew and ex-MLA fight for control

AHMEDABAD: A pathologist is locked in a bitter legal battle to win the guardianship of his uncle, an ageing advocate who suffers from a mental illness. The pathologist’s adversary in court is a former BJP MLA from Junagadh. At the heart of the guardianship conflict, which first reached a Junagadh court in 2011, lie properties worth several crores owned by the advocate. The assets include six parcels of land, agricultural and non-agricultural; a shop, and a flat. The advocate also has several bank accounts.

The Gujarat HC ordered last Friday that a mental health checkup be conducted on the 77-year-old advocate, Chandrakant Lakhani. The results will be among the considerations to decide whether guardianship should be granted to his nephew Dr Chetan Lakhani or to the politician and social activist, Mahendra Mashru.

In 2011, Chetan Lakhani had given his consent when Mashru moved court for the guardianship and to claim Chandrakant Lakhani’s properties. Mashru told the court that this voluntary organization was looking after Lakhani, who was reportedly suffering from schizophrenia.

Guardianship and property: Mental health to be tested

While the case was pending, Mashru withdrew his petition after the death of Chandrakant Lakhani’s wife. In 2014, Chetan Lakhani filed an application seeking an inquisition of his uncle so that his mental health could be examined. And Chetan Lakhani stated that based on the inquisition, he wanted be appointed the guardian to manage his uncle’s properties. Mashru jumped back into the fray, vehemently opposing Chetan Lakhani’s claim.

While Chetan Lakhani’s application for guardianship is pending, his demand for his uncle’s checkup was rejected by a Junagadh district court in 2015. He approached the high court in 2016 reiterating his request that his uncle be examined. He submitted a certificate issued by the district health officer showing that his uncle was suffering schizophrenia and had 40% mental illness. Chetan Lakhani’s advocate I H Syed told the high court that his client had agreed to Mashru’s bid to become the guardian in the hope that it was in the best interest of his uncle. But Mashru had withdrawn his application. Syed said that his client sought the guardianship of his uncle after his aunt’s death because he was the next of kin.

But Mashru’s lawyer, Dhigant Kakkad, contended: “As a social worker and a Good Samaritan, Mashru has taken up the cause of the mentally ill person. It would serve the purpose best if Mashru is entrusted with the management of the properties.” When Mashru’s lawyer said that immovable properties owned by Chandrakant Lakhani have already been disposed of, Chetan Lakhani’s lawyer countered that properties had been sold fraudulently and his client intends to challenge the sale deeds. Chetan Lakhani’s lawyer pointedly questioned Mashru’s involvement in the case, wondering why he was so concerned about his client’s uncle.

After hearing the case, Justice J B Pardiwala had in October last year ordered Junagadh Civil Hospital to form a team of doctors for Chandrakant Lakhani’s thorough examination. The high court also ordered the Junagadh court to decide on the guardianship within three months. But in February, the Junagadh court informed the high court that a medical examination was not possible because the GMERS, Junagadh, does not have neurology department.