Category Archives: HC orders closure of divorce case within 2 months

No decree for 2 years because family court judge is on leave! Madras HC says “ok finish case in 2 months”

Married in 2008, fighting court cases since 2010, these couple are at the first run / starting stage of the battle, i.e. they are at the Family court. It has taken four years from 2010 to 2014 for the case to reach “order” stage, but NO decree has been passed till 2016 (i.e.) for two years. So the parties reach the Madras HC !! One of the reasons cited by the counsel for the petitioner is that the judge is continuously on leave ! So, Hon Madras HC says ok finish the case in 2 more months ! God know when this case will be ordered and when the parties will put an end to their fights, because should one of the parties proceed on appeal to the HC that may take another 5 to 7 years !!

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 12.01.2016

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.MALA

CRP [PD] No.45 of 2016

R.Preetha                            .. Petitioner

Vs.

Udayarajan                            ..  Respondent

Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying to issue direction to the I Additional Family Court, Chennai to pass orders on O.P.No.200 of 2010 within a stipulated time fixed by this Hon’ble Court.

For Petitioner    :  Ms.Arulmozhi

ORDER

The petitioner has filed OP.No.200/2010 under section 13[1][ia] and section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking for dissolution of the marriage solemnised on 30.11.2008 on the ground of cruelty and to direct the respondent herein to pay permanent alimony of Rs.20 lakhs to her. Resisting the allegations made in OP.No.200/2010, the respondent has filed his counter affidavit and he has also filed OP.No.3035/2011 under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights. Both the petitions were tried jointly on the file of the learned I Additional Judge, Family Court, Chennai and the same were posted for orders on 29.04.2014. But, as on date, the orders are yet to be pronounced. Hence, the present Civil Revision Petition at the instance of the petitioner.

2 Since the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of at the admission stage as the prayer sought for by the petitioner is limited in nature, notice to the respondent is hereby dispensed with.

3 Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Presiding Officer, I Additional Family Court, Chennai is on continuous leave and that the Presiding Officer, II Additional Family Court, Chennai is in-charge and hence, suitable direction may be given to the Presiding Officer concerned for earlier disposal of OP.Nos.200/2010 and 3035/2011.

4 Considering the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and also perusal of the typed set of papers, this Court is of the view that the relief sought for by the petitioner is limited in nature and it is fit case to direct the Court concerned to dispose of the petitions in OP.Nos.200/2010 and 3035/2011 as expeditiously as possible.

5 Accordingly, the learned I Additional Judge, Family Court, Chennai or the Presiding Officer [In-charge] of the said Court, is directed to dispose of the cases in OP.Nos.200/2010 and 3035/2011 within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after giving fair opportunity to both sides.

6 The Civil Revision Petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs.

12.01.2016 AP To

1.The I Additional Judge Family Court, Chennai.

R.MALA, J.

AP CRP [PD] No.45/2016 12.01.2016

One side keeping matri case pending is harassment to other. Its a punishment to the other side. Madras HC !!

IF your wife is delaying the matrimonial case, Use this Madras HC judgement for speedy closure. In this case a husband approached the HC who has ordered closure of the case by FAMILY COURT within 2 months

“…. Noting that the family proceedings had been prolonged, longer than a regular civil suit, the judge said, “Keeping the case pending by one of the litigant, amounts to harassment to the other side. It is deliberately resorted to as a method of punishment to the other side.”

She said, “Emotional explosion is involved in almost all cases relating to matrimonial disputes. The interest of children is involved in several cases and pending dispute shatters mental peace. The future planning is kept under suspension. Procreation may become an impossibility because of the advancement of age. The impatient litigant may resort to illegal marriage.”

>>>>>>>> Article >>>>>>>>>>>>

Dispose of divorce cases fast: High Court

TNN | Feb 21, 2016, 09.06 AM IST

Chennai: Neither being able to ‘consummate’ his marriage for 13 years nor obtain divorce on the ground of cruelty for denial of conjugal rights, a man moved Madras high court for speedy end to the ordeal, prompting the court to repeat its oft-quoted phrase ‘Justice delayed is justice denied.’

Justice S Vimala, expressing distress at inordinate delay in disposal of divorce cases in family courts, said such delays in settling matrimonial disputes would emotionally disturb parties who would undergo ‘relentless worries’. Calling it the “silent cry of a husband, who is allegedly deprived of the conjugal relationship right from the date of marriage”, the judge then directed the third additional family court to dispose of the matter in two months.

Meenakshi Sundaram had moved the court to declare the marriage between him and his wife as a nullity, saying the wife was disinclined to live with him and that she refused to consummate the marriage. Noting that she refused to render conjugal company, which amounted to mental cruelty, he sought divorce on the ground of cruelty. Justice Vimala said it was a well-known fact that pendency of family court cases was mounting, bringing the judges under enormous pressure. “Despite the family court judges burning the midnight oil, they are not able to clear the pendency, because of the attitude of parties, procedural flexibility not being utilized, parties not willing to settle the matter at the earliest point of time and pre-litigation settlement not being utilized.

Noting that the family proceedings had been prolonged, longer than a regular civil suit, the judge said, “Keeping the case pending by one of the litigant, amounts to harassment to the other side. It is deliberately resorted to as a method of punishment to the other side.”

She said, “Emotional explosion is involved in almost all cases relating to matrimonial disputes. The interest of children is involved in several cases and pending dispute shatters mental peace. The future planning is kept under suspension. Procreation may become an impossibility because of the advancement of age. The impatient litigant may resort to illegal marriage.”

It is for the judges of family courts to find out ways and means to dispose of the cases quickly. “Bottlenecks in the system and the handicap for judges, if any, should be discussed in judicial academies and solutions in terms of either change in law or change in procedure or change in attitude of the parties must emerge,” Justice Vimala said. She urged family courts to make use of alternative disputes resolution (ADR) methods such as conciliation, mediation and lok adalat, and said, “There is a duty enjoined on family courts to make efforts for settlement at the first instance, wherever it is possible to do so, consistent with the nature and circumstance of the case. Settlement brings finality to the litigation and peace to the family.”

source
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com
/city/
chennai/