The provisions of Order VIII Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code should not be strictly applied in Family Court proceedings, and the Family Court failed to provide valid reasons for deferring consideration of the application for interim maintenance.

JUDGMENT

Yashwant Varma, J. - This petition has been preferred challenging the orders of 17th January 2020 and 04th September 2020 passed by the Principal Judge Family Court. By the order of 17th January 2020, the Court noticing that the petitioner here had not filed a written statement, granted four weeks" time and called upon the respondent to file his replication, if any. The Principal Judge also took note of an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") which had remained pending before its Court. It, accordingly, called upon the party-respondent to file a reply to the said application. By the second order of 04th September, 2021, the Court took note of the contention of the respondent that since the petitioner here had failed to file a written statement, the provisions of Order VIII Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code would apply and consequently consideration of the application for interim maintenance be deferred till such time as the written statement is tendered.

2. The Family Judge after noticing the rival contentions proceeded to hold and record as follows:

"..However, after hearing learned counsel for the respondent and perusing the entire facts and circumstances of the case, in my view, it is essential that respondent must file WS in due course. The Court has to peruse the pleadings of both the parties and their affidavit of income, asset and liabilities while deciding the application under Section 24 of the HMA.

Hence, in my view, there is no merit in the submission of learned counsel for the respondent that respondent be not insisted for willing WS till her application under Section 24 of the HMA is decided and hence accordingly let WS be filed by the respondent positively within four weeks with copy to the other side.

Replication two weeks thereafter.

Let petitioner also file his affidavit of income, asset and liability positively within four weeks. No further opportunity shall be granted."

3. When this petition initially came to be entertained impugning the aforesaid two orders, a learned Judge passed the following significant directions on 02nd February, 2021 and 10th March, 2021: -

Order of 02nd February, 2021-

"4. During the meeting with the parties, at this stage, they appear to have reconciled to the position that they must commence interaction with each other, keeping in mind the interest of the child. Considering the fact that the child is 5 years of age, this Court is inclined to put in place an interim arrangement. Accordingly, the following interim arrangement is being passed:

i. The father would be permitted to speak with the child through electronic mode, preferably by a video call, every evening for 15 to 20 minutes. The time shall be communicated in advance to Ms. Esha Dhir, who would cooperate to facilitate the said call.

ii. The father would be allowed to meet the child on 13th February, 2021 and 14th February, 2021. He would be permitted to pick up the child and Ms. Esha Dhir at about 11.30 am, to spend 4 to 5 hours with them. If the father wishes to spend solitary time with the child, Ms. Esha Dhir can be in a visible and non-audible distance for some during the said period. The father should drop them back to the residence of Ms. Esha Dhir, who is living with her parents, by 05.00 pm. Similarly, the father would be permitted one more physical meeting with the child, in the same terms, on a date which can be mutually agreed upon by him and Esha Dhir. This meeting would also be facilitated by Ms. Esha Dhir.

iii. A sum of Rs. 15,000/- shall be paid by Mr. Sparsh Dhir to Ms. Esha Dhir by the 10th of every month with effect from February, 2021. The first payment shall be made by the 10th of February."

Order dated 10th March, 2021-

"6. With the consent of the parties, the following interim arrangement shall operate till the next date of hearing:

i) The child shall be permitted to video call with the father on a daily basis for a period of 20 minutes, betwee