Family Courts Expected To Act With Due Application Of Mind Without Being Hyper- Technical, Should Have Litigant Friendly Approach: Delhi High Court

  • Post category:Daily Judgments
  • Reading time:4 mins read

Family Courts Expected To Act With Due Application Of Mind Without Being Hyper- Technical, Should Have Litigant Friendly Approach

Case: Ajay Dubey V. Annapurna

Coram: Mr. Justice Vipin Sanghi & Mr. Justice Jasmeet Singh

Case No: Mat.App.(F.C.) 87/2021

Court Observation: “The Family Court is obliged to function so as to relieve the parties of the suffering that they are going through on account of matrimonial disputes. It is expected to act with due application of mind and without being hypertechnical about matters brought before it. The Family Court should have a litigant friendly approach, and function in the spirit of helping parties resolve their disputes – either mutually, or through the Courts determination.”

“We may also note that senior and experienced Judicial Officers are posted as Principal Judges of the Family Courts, with the expectation that they will display legal acumen and maturity in dealing with matrimonial and custody disputes.”

“There is no doubt that there was a drafting error – as extracted hereinabove, in both these petitions, with regard to the territorial jurisdiction of the Family Court. The relevant paragraph was not drafted with application of mind,”

“Therefore, merely because the party residing within the territorial jurisdiction of the Family Court was arrayed as the Petitioners, and not the Respondent, would not make any difference,” “We, therefore, allow the present appeal and set aside the impugned orders. We restore HMA No. 1701/2020 before the Family Court, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi. The parties shall appear on 22.09.2021 before the Family Court for consideration of the Second Motion Petition.”

[doc id=9822]

Previous Posts

Successful Allottee/ Bidder Free To Decide Whether To Continue Any Existing Contracts In Relation To Coal Mining Operation: SC

Order VII Rule 11 CPC: Plaint Has To Be Rejected If Reliefs Claimed In It Cannot Be Granted Under Law: Supreme Court

Change Of Date Of Birth In-Service Records Cannot Be Claimed As Of Right; Can Be Rejected For Delay & Latches: Supreme Court

Assessee Not Liable To Pay Interest On Short Payment Of Advance Tax Due To Default Of Payer In Deducting TDS Before 2012-2013 FY: Supreme Court

Order VII Rule 11 CPC – Plaint Can’t Be Rejected If Limitation Is A Mixed Question Of Law & Fact: Supreme Court Download Judgement