Back
2011 Supreme(AP) 378
2011(5)ALD799
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
B. Prakash Rao and G. Bhavani Prasad, JJ.
In Re : Matrimonial Matters
Decided On: 27.04.2011
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: J.V. Suryanarayana, T. Lakshminarayana, G. Vidya Sagar, (Mrs.) M. Bkaskara Laksbmi, SC for Legal Services Committee (assisted the Court as amicus curiae)
Headnote:
Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 – Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Section 89 – Orders X, XLIII and XXXII-A – Rule 1-A and Rule 2 and Rule 3 – Civil Rules of Practice – Rule 15-A – Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Section 23(2) –Family Court Act, 1984 – Section 9 – Matrimonial disputes – Reconciliation – Mediation – Pre litigation matters – Guidelines – Matters arising out of matrimonial disputes, it was observed that the records mostly did not disclose any attempts for reconciliation between the parties made by the trial Courts and appellate Courts notwithstanding the specific provisions of law in this regard – Relevant statistical particulars should be obtained in order to issue necessary directions concerning appropriate steps to be taken by the Courts – Accordingly, the Registry of the High Court collected information from all the Courts in the State and reported that the total cases involving matrimonial disputes were 8,396 out of which in 123 cases, no steps were taken for reconciliation - Though in the remaining cases the information was suggestive of steps being taken for reconciliation, the information was mostly vague, indefinite and general and not specific as to what was done in discharge of the solemn duty of the Court in this regard – Reference to the Legal Services Authorities or Legal Services Committees under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 or Lok Adalats constituted by such Authorities or Committees was also stated in a significant number of cases to be the step taken by the Court for attempting reconciliation and nothing further was claimed by the concerned Courts to have been done in this regard except making a reference to such Authorities or Committees or Lok Adalats – Held, However, insofar as the Civil Procedure Alternative Dispute Resolution and Mediation Rules suggested by the Committee are concerned, they are incorporated in Chapter XX of the Civil Rules of Practice and Circular Orders, 1980 in two parts from Rule 307 to Rule 340, which are deemed to have come into force with effect on and from 22.2.2006 as notified under G.O. Ms. No.40 Law (LA&J-Home Courts.D) Department, dated 2.4.2008. Rule 313 of the said rules specifically provides that the provisions of these rules may be applied to proceedings before the Courts, including Family Courts constituted under Family Courts Act (66 of 1984), while dealing with matrimonial, maintenance and child custody disputes, wherever necessary, in addition to the rules framed under the Family Courts Act. Rule 307 directs the procedure directing parties to opt for alternative modes of settlement to commence after recording admissions and denials at the first hearing of the suit under Order X Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure – Order accordingly.
G. Bhavani Prasad, J.
1. During the course of hearing of matters arising out of matrimonial disputes, it was observed that the records mostly did not disclose any attempts for reconciliation between the parties made by the trial Courts and appellate Courts notwithstanding the specific provisions of law in this regard.
2. It was, therefore, felt that relevant statistical particulars should be obtained in order to issue necessary directions concerning appropriate steps to be taken by the Courts in this regard. Accordingly, the Registry of the High Court collected information from all the Courts in the State and reported that the total cases involving matrimonial disputes were 8,396 out of which in 123 cases, no steps were taken for reconciliation. Though in the remaining cases the information was suggestive of steps being taken for reconciliation, the information was mostly vague, indefinite and general and not specific as to what was done in discharge of the solemn duty of the Court in this regard. Reference to the Legal Services Authorities or Legal Services Committees under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 or Lok Adalats constituted by such Authorities or Committees was also stated in a significant number of cases to be the step taken by the Court for attempting reconciliation and nothing further was claimed by the concerned Courts to have been done in this regard except making a reference to such Authorities or Committees or Lok Adalats.
3. A report had also been received from the Andhra Pradesh State Legal Services Authority, which stated that matters are being entrusted to mediators on the panels with the Authorities on receipt of matters from the Courts, who are conducting mediation in such number of sittings as may be necessary to assist the parties to explore the possibilities of amicable settlements. If settled, agreements signed by the parties are being executed and forwarded to the Court concerned. The Authority also stated that in prelitigation matters, on receipt of applications, notices are being issued to all the parties concerned to appear before the mediators and if the parties appeared, mediation is being conducted on the same lines and the matter is being referred to the Court having jurisdiction to dispose of the case in accordance with the agreement between the parties.
4. The Member Secretary of the Andhra Pradesh State Legal Service Authority also stated in his report that 11 mediation centres were set up in the State at Hyderabad, Ranga Reddy District, Warangal, Karimnagar, Kadapa, Chittoor at Tirupati, Guntur, Krishna at Vijayawada, East Godavari at Rajahmundry, Visakhapatnam and High Court Legal Services Committee, Hyderabad as directed by the National Legal Services Authority and training was also imparted to the officers of the Legal Services Authorities and Committees and mediators by the Supreme Court Mediation and Conciliation Project Committee for 40 hours each. The statistical information furnished shows that 282 matters were referred by the Courts to the Authorities and Committees, while 317 matters were pre-litigation matters.
5. Sri G. Vidya Sugar, Smt. M. Bhaskara Lakshmi and Sri J. V. Suryanarayana, Senior Counsel assisted by Sri T. Lakshminarayana were the learned Counsel who had been gracious enough to assist the Court in consideration of the matters at the request of the Court.
6. Sri J. V. Suryanarayana and Sri T. Lakshminarayana suggested incorporating an additional rule in the rules framed by the High Court under the Andhra Pradesh Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and the Civil Rules of Practice and addition of a proviso to Order XLIII Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which are as follows:
15-A
1. In all matrimonial matters, the Court hearing such a proceeding under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, shall, as soon as may be after both the parties have entered appearance, consistently with Section 23(2) of the Act, ascertain a day convenient to both the parties, and post the pe
