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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
K.R. Mohapatra, J.
Sunanda Kar @ Rath - Petitioner
Versus
Sudip Rath – Opposite Party
W.P.(C) No. 15858 OF 2022
Decided On : 30-08-2022

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Maheswar Mohanty, Advocate

Post-establishment of a Family Court, all execution proceedings must fall under its jurisdiction as per the Family Courts Act, including those filed prior to its establishment.

Headnote:(A) Family Courts Act, 1984 - Sections 7 and 8 - Jurisdiction of Family Court - Order passed by Family Court directing return of execution proceeding to Civil Court based on perceived lack of jurisdiction for execution case filed before establishment of Family Court - Section 8 excludes jurisdiction of Civil Courts in matters within Family Court's jurisdiction including execution proceedings. (Paras 5, 7.2, 8)

(B) Jurisdiction - The execution proceeding of restitution of conjugal rights falls under the purview of the Family Court post-establishment, overruling previous court assertions. Family Court's authority in execution matters affirmed as essential to its operational mandate. (Paras 7.3, 8)

Facts of the case:
The Petitioner challenges the Family Court's order sending back Execution Case No.16 of 2009 to Civil Court, arguing all proceedings related to family matters, including execution, should be handled by Family Court after its establishment in 2010.

Findings of Court:
The learned Civil Judge at Puri lacks jurisdiction over the execution proceeding, which should instead be heard by the Family Court as per statutory provisions.

Issues: Whether the execution proceeding falls under the jurisdiction of the Family Court established after the original case filing.

Ratio Decidendi: Sections 7 and 8 of the Family Courts Act confirm that post-establishment of Family Court, all relevant execution proceedings must be adjudicated within the Family Court’s jurisdiction irrespective of prior civil court interactions.

Result: The impugned order set aside, Execution Case No.16 of 2009 to be entertained by the Family Court, Puri.

Table of Content
1. overview of execution case and jurisdiction issues. (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
2. petitioner's argument on family court's jurisdiction. (Para 5 , 6)
3. court’s analysis on jurisdiction of family court for execution. (Para 7)
4. court finds no jurisdiction for civil judge after family court establishment. (Para 8)
5. order issued to set aside previous ruling and enforce jurisdiction. (Para 9)

ORDER :

K.R. MOHAPATRA, J.

1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2. The Petitioner in this writ petition seeks to assail the order dated 15th December, 2021 (Annexure-7) passed by learned Judge, Family Court, Puri in Execution Case No.16 of 2009, sending back the case record to the Court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Puri to adjudicate the execution proceeding holding that since Family Court at Puri was not in existence on the date of filing of the execution case, the provision of Section 8 (c) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 (for convenience, ‘the Act’) would not be attracted.

3. Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel submits that the Opposite Party filed MAT Case No.227 of 2002 before learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Puri for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce. The Petitioner filed counter claim for restitution of conjugal rights and consequential relief. The suit for dissolution of marriage was dismissed and counter claim for restitution of conjugal rights was allowed. Since the Opposite Party did not comply with the said direction, Execution Case No. 16 of 2009 was filed in the Court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Puri. During pendency of the execution proceeding, Family Court, Puri was established on 23rd June, 2010. Accordingly, the J.Dr.-Opposite Party filed an application for transfer of the execution proceeding to Family Court, Puri. On receipt of the application, learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Puri vide his letter dated 19th May, 2012 sought for administrative approval to transfer the execution proceeding to the Family Court, Puri. After receiving administrative approval, the record in execution case was transferred to the Family Court, Puri on 19th June, 2012. Since then, parties are participating in the execution proceeding before the Family Court, Puri. When the matter stood thus, learned Judge, Family Court, Puri raising doubt about its jurisdiction to entertain the execution proceeding, examined the matter and vide order dated 15th December, 2021 under Annexure-7, directed to send back the case record to the Court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Puri to deal with the execution proceeding holding that the provision under Section 8 (c) of the Act is not applicable to the case in hand.

4. Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for the Petitioner further submits that Section 7 of the Act deals with the jurisdiction of the Family Court and Section 8 deals with exclusion of the jurisdiction and pending proceeding before any other Court over which Family Court established for the area, has jurisdiction. For ready reference, the provisions are reproduced hereunder:

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

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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