THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Parthivjyoti Saikia, J.
Rangila Hazarika, W/O Late Bibhuti Bhusan Das - Petitioner
Versus
Lani Das, C/O S.N. Deka – Respondent
RSA 198 of 2013
Decided On : 16-03-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. respondent's marriage and subsequent claim. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 2. trial court decreed respondent's suit. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. substantial questions of law framed. (Para 7) |
| 4. jurisdiction under family courts act clarified. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 5. second appeal allowed; case remanded. (Para 12 , 13) |
JUDGMENT :
Parthivjyoti Saikia, J.
Heard Mr. A.K. Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as Mr. H.K. Sarma, learned counsel representing the respondent.
2. This is a Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 of the CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE (CPC) whereby the judgment dated 22.05.2013 passed by the court of learned Civil Judge No.2, Kamrup in Title Appeal No.92/2012 affirming the judgment and decree dated 27.06.2012 passed by the learned Munsiff No.4, Kamrup in T.S. No.103/2008, is under challenge.
3. On 30th January, 1986, the respondent married late Bibhuti Bhusan Das according to Hindu rituals. Bibhuti Bhusan Das was an employee of the Postal Department. Because of the service conditions, he had to work at different places. On 08.10.2006, Bibhuti Bhusan Das died.
4. The respondent then filed applications before the Postal Department for getting the service benefits of her deceased husband. At that time, she came to know that the present appellant claiming to be the wife of her deceased husband, filed an application being O.A. No.22/2007 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Guwahati Bench.
5. On the basis of the aforesaid facts, the respondent filed the suit before the court below praying for a declaration that she is the legally married wife of late Bibhuti Bhusan Das.
6. The trial court decreed the suit of the respondent and the appellate court also affirmed the judgment of the trial court.
7. The second appeal was admitted for hearing the parties upon the following substantial questions of law:
1. Whether the learned Munsiff, after constitution of the Family Court under Section 8 of the Family Courts Act 1984, has jurisdiction to decide the suit, in view of the explanation (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 7 of the Act?
8. I have given my anxious considerations to the submissions made by the learned counsel of both sides.
9. At this stage, a brief visit to Section 7 of the Family Courts Act 1984 would be fruitful. It reads as under:
“7. 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 the purposes of exercising such jurisdiction under such law, to be a district court or, as the case may be, such subordinate civil court for the area to which the jurisdiction of the Family Court extends.
Explanation.-The suits and proceedings referred to in this sub-section are suits and proceedings of the following nature, namely:-
(a)a suit or proceeding between the parties to a marriage for a decree of nullity of marriage (declaring the marriage to be null and void or, as the case may be, annulling the marriage) or restitution of conjugal rights or judicial separation or dissolution of marriage;
(b) a suit or proceeding for a declaration as to the validity of a marriage or as to the matrimonial status of any person;
(c) a suit or proceeding between the parties to a marriage with respect to the property of the parties or of either of them;
(d)a suit or proceeding for an order or injunction in circumstances arising out of a marital relationship;
(e) a suit or proceeding for a declaration as to the legitimacy of any person;(f)a suit or proceeding for maintenance;
(g) a suit or proceeding in relation to the guardianship of the person or the custody of, or access to, any minor.
(2) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, a Family Court shall also have and exercise-
(a) the jurisdiction exercisable by a Magistrate of the First Class under Chapter IX (relati
Family Courts possess exclusive jurisdiction over matrimonial status claims, superseding ordinary civil courts as per Section 7(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984.
Civil courts retain jurisdiction for suits seeking declarations of marital status under Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act when a Family Court is absent, as provided by the Family Courts Act.
A Family Court has exclusive jurisdiction to declare marital status under the Family Courts Act, rendering such suits filed in civil courts non-maintainable.
Family Court lacks jurisdiction over third-party claims regarding marital status; remedies must be sought in civil courts.
The jurisdiction of civil courts is limited where a Family Court has been established, barring civil suits concerning marital status declarations.
The Family Courts possess exclusive jurisdiction to declare matrimonial status, rendering suits maintainable even post the husband's death, affirming marriage validity standards under applicable Hind....
Family Courts have exclusive jurisdiction over marital status declarations and property disputes related to marriage, as established by the Family Courts Act, 1984.
(1) No one should be vexed twice for same cause of action. Cause of action must be same for application of Order II Rule 2 of CPC.(2) Concept of Order II Rule 2 of CPC is alien to Family Court procee....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.