SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(SC) 320

KURIAN JOSEPH, ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN
Balram Yadav – Appellant
Versus
Fulmaniya Yadav – Respondent


JUDGMENT :

Kurian, J.

Leave granted.

1. The appellant instituted a Civil Suit before the Family Court, Ambikapur, Sarguja, Chhattisgarh seeking a declaration to the effect that respondent is not his legally married wife. By judgment dated 28.12.2013, the Civil Suit was decreed declaring that the respondent was not appellant's legally married wife.

2. The respondent, being aggrieved, moved the High Court of Chhattisgarh. The High court, as per the impugned order dated 14.01.2015, allowed the appeal holding that the Family Court lacked jurisdiction to deal with the matter. According to the High Court, a negative declaration was outside the jurisdiction of the Family Court.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

4. Section 7 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 (for short “the Act”) deals with the jurisdiction of the Family Courts, which reads as follows:-

“Jurisdiction.-

(1) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, a Family Court shall-

(a) have and exercise all the jurisdiction exercisable by any district court or any subordinate civil court under any law for the time being in force in respect of suits and proceedings of the nature referred to in the explanation; and

(b) be deemed, for t
























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top