The main legal point established is the importance of physical presence in reconciliatory efforts and the difficulty of maintaining confidentiality in video conferencing in matrimonial disputes.

ORDER :

1. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking for transfer of O.P.(HMA) No.580 of 2015 filed for dissolution of marriage of the respondent and petitioner and O.P. No.1282 of 2012 filed for custody of minor child, from the Court of Family Court, Alappuzha, Kerala to Family Court, Chennai, Tamil Nadu.

2. When the matter came up for consideration before this Court, learned counsel appearing for the respondent brought to our notice a decision rendered by a coordinate Bench of this Court in Krishna Veni Nagam v. Harish Nagam, (2017) 4 SCC 150 and requested that there is no need to transfer the cases; instead parties can be directed to avail the facility of video conferencing, as suggested by this Court in the case referred to above.

3. In Krishna Veni Nagam (supra) a coordinate Bench of this Court went into the issue of preventing the backlog of transfer petitions before the Courts. It appears that the Court also had the assistance of an amicus. Having heard the learned Counsel on both the sides and learned amicus, the Court finally, at paragraph-18, issued the following directions:-

“18. We, therefore, direct that in matrimonial or custody matters or in proceedings between parties to a marriage or arising out of disputes between parties to a marriage, wherever the defendants/respondents are located outside the jurisdiction of the court, the court where proceedings are instituted, may examine whether it is in the interest of justice to incorporate any safeguards for ensuring that summoning of defendant/respondent does not result in denial of justice. Order incorporating such safeguards may be sent along with the summons. The safeguards can be:-

i. Availability of video conferencing facility.

ii. Availability of legal aid service.

iii. Deposit of cost for travel, lodging and boarding in terms of Order XXV CPC.

iv. E-mail address/phone number, if any, at which litigant from out station may communicate.”

4. We are informed that not only this Court but the High Courts and even the District Courts are passing orders in the light of the judgment referred to above, relegating the parties to video conferencing even where such facilities are not available. Thus, it is a situation not only of inter State appeal or intra State appeal but also of intra District appeal.

5. Having due regard to the nature of family disputes sought to be addressed by the Parliament, we are afraid, the Court in Krishna Veni Nagam (supra) has not been furnished with the required information, before passing the order.

6. The Family Courts Act, 1984 was introduced with the following purpose:-

“INTRODUCTION

From time to time, it had been urged by several organisations of women, other organisations and individuals that Family Courts be set-up for the settlement of family disputes. The Law Commission in its 59th Report had also stressed that in dealing with disputes concerning the family the court ought to adopt an approach radically different from that adopted in ordinary civil proceedings and that it should make reasonable efforts at settlement before the commencement of the trial. In 1976 the Code of Civil Procedure was also amended to provide for a special procedure to be adopted in suits or proceedings relating to matters concerning the family, but not much change in the attitude of the courts was noticed. Therefore, the need was felt to establish Family Courts for speedy settlement of family disputes. Accordingly the Family Courts Bill was introduced in the Parliament.

STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS

Several associations of women, other organisations and individuals have urged, from time to time, that Family Courts be set up for the settlement of family disputes, where emphasis should be laid on conciliation and achieving socially desirable results and adherence to rigid rules of procedure and evidence should be eliminated. The Law Commission in its 59th report (1974) had also stressed that in dealing with disputes concerning the family the court ought to adopt an