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

2021 Supreme(Bom) 709

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Nitin W. Sambre, J.
Mr. Sanket Sanjeev Khanolkar - Appellant
Versus
Mrs. Surabhi Sanket Khanolkar - Respondent
Misc. Civil Application (St) No. 5825 of 2020
Decided On : 15-02-2021

Advocates appeared:
Ms. Jai Vaidya, for the Appellant / Ms. Gayatri Gokhale A/W Jitendra Gokhale, for the Respondent.

The Family Court has jurisdiction to entertain applications for reliefs under the D.V. Act, and the provisions of the Family Courts Act, particularly Section 19 providing for appeal, must be considered to avoid conflicting decisions.

Headnote:

Transfer - Civil Procedure Code - Section 24 - Transfer of proceedings from Metropolitan Magistrate Court to Family Court - Section 26 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - Judgments referred to: Hitesh Prakashmalji Mehta vs. Ashika Hitesh Mehta, Santosh Machindra Mulik vs. Mohini Mithu Choudhari, Sandip Mrinmoy Chakraboarty vs. Reshita Sandip Chakrabarty & Anr., Abhishek N. Billawa & Ors. vs. Tejashree Abhishek Billawa, Dr. Santosh Kumar Shetty vs. Smita Shetty & Anr. - The court discussed the jurisdiction of the Family Court to entertain applications for reliefs under sections 18 to 22 of the D.V. Act, the right of appeal/revision, and the provisions of the Family Courts Act. It held that the Family Court has jurisdiction to entertain applications for reliefs under the D.V. Act and that the provisions of the Family Courts Act, particularly Section 19 providing for appeal, must be considered. The court emphasized the need to avoid conflicting decisions and granted the transfer of proceedings.

Fact of the Case:

The application sought transfer of proceedings from the Metropolitan Magistrate Court to the Family Court, as both divorce and domestic violence proceedings were initiated by the non-applicant wife. The applicant-husband claimed transfer to avoid contradictory findings, save judicial time, and prevent hardship to the parties.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the Family Court has jurisdiction to entertain applications for reliefs under the D.V. Act and emphasized the need to avoid conflicting decisions. It granted the transfer of proceedings.

Issues: The issues revolved around the jurisdiction of the Family Court to entertain applications for reliefs under the D.V. Act, the right of appeal/revision, and the provisions of the Family Courts Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Family Court has jurisdiction to entertain applications for reliefs under the D.V. Act and emphasized the need to avoid conflicting decisions. It considered the provisions of the Family Courts Act, particularly Section 19 providing for appeal, and granted the transfer of proceedings.

Final Decision: The court granted the transfer of proceedings from the Metropolitan Magistrate Court to the Family Court, emphasizing the need to avoid conflicting decisions and urging the court below to expeditiously decide the proceedings taken out by the non-applicant wife for grant of interim maintenance.

JUDGMENT

1. This is an application under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code seeking transfer of the proceedings i.e. D.V. Application No.44 of 2020 pending on the file of 5th Court of Metropolitan Magistrate Bhoiwada, Mumbai to Family Court, Bandra which is dealing with divorce proceeding bearing Lodging No. 2137 of 2020.

2. The parties to the application got married on 19/12/2010 and out of matrimonial differences both the aforesaid proceedings are initiated. In both these proceedings, applicant-husband is non-applicant and he has sought transfer of proceedings from the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate to the Family Court.

3. According to the learned Counsel for the applicant, transfer is required to be ordered so as to avoid contradictory findings on the same set of facts, to save judicial time, avoid hardship to the parties and also to avoid repetition of the proceedings. The learned Counsel for the Applicant has placed reliance on the following judgments in the matters of (1) Hitesh Prakashmalji Mehta vs. Ashika Hitesh Mehta, delivered on 28/9/2020 in Misc. civil Application (St) No.788 of 2020, (2) Mr. Santosh Machindra Mulik vs. Mrs. Mohini Mithu Choudhari, delivered on 15/11/2019 in Misc. Civil Application No.64 of 2019, (3) Sandip Mrinmoy Chakraboarty vs. Reshita Sandip Chakrabarty & Anr., delivered on 6/9/2018 in Criminal Writ Petition No.4649 of 2015, (4) Mr. Abhishek N. Billawa & Ors. vs. Mrs. Tejashree Abhishek Billawa delivered on 14/12/2020 in Misc. Civil Application No.47 of 2020, (5) Dr. Santosh Kumar Shetty vs. Mrs. Smita Shetty & Anr., delivered on 20/11/2019 in Criminal Application No.273 of 2019.

4. While countering the aforesaid submissions, learned Counsel for the non-applicant would urge that proceedings which are initiated by the non-applicant/wife are first in point of time. It is also claimed that non-applicant is yet to appear before the Family Court. By inviting attention of this Court to the provisions of Section 26 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (herein after referred to as "D.V. Act" for the sake of brevity) and also to the object of the said Act, it is claimed that the non-applicant is a master of proceedings which she has initiated. It is submitted that provisions of Section 26 is not enabling or substantive provision and as such non-applicant will be at loss in case proceedings are ordered to be transferred. He has invited attention of this Court to the judgment of this Court in the matter of Abhijeet Prabhakar Jail vs. Manisha Abhijeet Jail & Anr delivered on June 5, 2018 in Criminal Application No. 732 of 2017, particularly para 9 which reads thus :

"9. However, the application claiming reliefs including those provided for under Sections 18 to 22 of the Domestic Violence Act is required to be filed before the Magistrate which alone has jurisdiction to entertain it. No doubt, an aggrieved person/woman can independently claim such reliefs available to her under the Domestic Violence Act through Civil Court or Family Court, in addition to the relief claimed from those Courts in such proceedings. However, her right to file the proceeding before the Magistrate under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act cannot be made sterile by transferring such already initiated proceedings to the Family Court. The proceedings initiated under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act before the Court of competent jurisdiction i.e. the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pune cannot be ordered to be transferred to the Family Court at Pune. Those proceedings will have to be entertained and decided by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pune itself. The Domestic Violence Act has been enacted to provide for a remedy which is intended to protect the woman from being victim of domestic violence and to prevent the occurrence of domestic violence in the society. The Domestic Violence Act aims at providing speedy remedy to victims of domestic violence and necessary provisions are made i

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 Back to top