IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, C.S. DIAS, JJ.
Shiju Joy. A., S/o. A.V. Joy - Petitioner
Versus
Nisha, D/o. Kumaran – Respondent
O.P (FC) Nos.352, 420, 433, 436, 441, 447, 456, 493, 517, 526 of 2020 & 35, 37, 38, 43, 45, 47, 51, 52, 58, 60, 64, 65, 66, 68, 69, 73, 74, 76, 78 & 89 of 2021
Decided On : 23-03-2021
Family Courts - Delay in Disposal of Cases - Family Courts Act, 1984 - K.A. Abdul Jaleel v. T.A. Shahida [(2003) 4 SCC 166], Bhuwan Mohan Singh v. Meena and others [(2015) 6 SCC 353] - The court addressed the inordinate delay in disposal of cases by Family Courts in the State, highlighting the purpose of the Family Courts Act and emphasizing the need for expeditious resolution of matrimonial disputes. The court issued directions to streamline a uniform procedure for the disposal of cases before the Family Courts, emphasizing the importance of timely justice and professional management of matrimonial disputes.
Fact of the Case:
The court was asked to resolve the difficulties caused by the inordinate delay in disposal of cases by the Family Courts in the State. The petitioners sought directions to the Family Courts to expeditiously dispose of pending proceedings due to various hurdles faced in resolving matrimonial disputes.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the delay in disposal of cases before the Family Courts was multifaceted, caused by lack of infrastructure, docket explosion, untrained officers and staff, and inept case management. It emphasized the need for expeditious resolution of matrimonial disputes and issued directions to streamline a uniform procedure for the disposal of cases before the Family Courts.
Issues: The issues involved the inordinate delay in disposal of cases by the Family Courts, the challenges faced by litigants in resolving matrimonial disputes, and the need for professional management of such disputes.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the purpose of the Family Courts Act, emphasizing the need for expeditious resolution of matrimonial disputes and the importance of timely justice. It highlighted the challenges faced by Family Courts and issued directions to streamline a uniform procedure for the disposal of cases, emphasizing the professional management of matrimonial disputes.
Final Decision: The court disposed of the original petitions by directing the Family Courts to strictly comply with the outlined directions, including the activation of the Chief Ministerial Officer, implementation of the special list system, expeditious disposal of execution petitions, and adherence to timeframes for disposal of cases. The directions were to be implemented with effect from 1st of June, 2021, and the Family Courts were directed to report compliance by 31/12/2021.
JUDGMENT :
[A. Muhamed Mustaque & C.S. Dias, JJ.]
1. We are, in this batch of original petitions, asked to resolve the difficulties caused to the litigants due to the inordinate delay in disposal of cases by the Family Courts in the State. These original petitions speak about the various hurdles faced by the parties in resolving their matrimonial disputes. The petitioners who are parties to different proceedings, have invoked the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution and sought for directions to the Family Courts to expeditiously dispose of pending proceedings. It was a routine practice in this Court to call for reports from the Family Courts and issue directions to dispose of proceedings in a time bound manner. This has caused perceived injustice to many, as those who approach this Court stand in advantageous position in getting their cases disposed of on a priority basis. The delay involved in disposal of cases before the Family Courts cannot be signified for a singular reason. The problems faced are multifaceted and are of different dimensions. Lack of infrastructure, docket explosion, untrained officers and staff, inept case management etc., are a few to list.
2. The Family Courts are conceived to deal with conflicts relating to marriage and family affairs with humane consideration. The procedure ordained under the enactment is to help the parties to resolve their disputes in a harmonious way in preference to adversarial litigation. Parties are not entitled, as of right, to be represented by a legal practitioner before the Family Courts. The lawyers, who are trained in adversarial litigation, do not want to shed their role as adversarial counsel in matrimonial disputes. The rules and procedures formulated for Family Courts are often forgotten in the process. The objects and reasons in establishing Family Courts, to deal with matrimonial disputes, with informal setting are to break the shackles of rigid rules and procedures followed in civil courts. Many of the Judges as well as lawyers are not really equipped to handle family disputes befitting to the standards required under law, which adds to the cause for the delay.
3. The parties who approach the Family Courts with their grievances, with a hope to get speedy justice, very soon realise that their problems burgeon, cases multiply, and their ordeal unabatedly continues due to the adversarial nature and circumstances surrounding the litigation.
4. The State of Kerala, which accounts for 3% of Country’s population, has one of the highest numbers of matrimonial cases in the Nation. The statistics available with the NJDG gives a clear picture of the story. At present, there is a staggering 104015 cases pending in the 28 Family Courts in the State. This data is alarming and if at all not shocking; it speaks about the disintegration of the family culture and the anomie our society is facing. We had a structured society in the past where everyone held hands to resolve such conflicts. Today, we witness alienation or aloofness of individuals from the larger family, society and the community as a whole. Disputes soar to fierce battles combated through the adversarial litigation. Causes are projected to establish one’s rights sans their obligations, forcing the Family Courts to drift its role as conceived under law and to embark the lines of a normal court.
5. A three-Judge Bench of the Honourable Supreme Court in K.A. Abdul Jaleel v. T.A. Shahida [(2003) 4 SCC 166], while highlighting on the purpose of bringing in the Family Courts Act by the legislature, opined thus:
K.A. Abdul Jaleel v. T.A. Shahida
Bhuwan Mohan Singh v. Meena and others
Amardeep Singh v. Harveen Kaur
Yashita Sahu v. State of Rajasthan and Others
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for expeditious resolution of matrimonial disputes and the professional management of such disputes, emphasizing the importance of timely ....
Family Courts must expedite matrimonial proceedings to prevent emotional distress, adhering to statutory time limits for resolution.
The court emphasized the necessity for timely disposal of cases in Family Courts to ensure justice.
Judicial efficiency mandates timely handling of Family Court applications to prevent undue delays.
Family Courts have discretion in managing their procedural schedules without interference, ensuring efficient case handling while allowing litigants the option to seek remedies.
The judiciary must enforce compliance with its own directives to ensure timely justice in maintenance cases, as systemic delays undermine the rule of law and affect vulnerable parties.
The petitioner can request expedited hearings directly at the Family Court, as established in previous rulings.
The court has emphasized the need for timely resolutions in family court cases, supporting applications for expediting proceedings.
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.