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
| 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
AI
The words "by the other Family Court or ordinary civil court" in Section 18(3) of the Act is controlled and guided by the words "to which it is sent for execution". If it is not sent, undoubtedly the....
Point of law: Enforcement of the order of maintenance is provided under Section 128 of Cr.P.C., giving option to the wife to seek enforcement either in a place where the order was passed or in a plac....
The Family Court has jurisdiction to entertain applications under Order IX Rule 13 C.P.C. as per Section 10 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, and a writ of prohibition cannot be issued against a court ....
The Family Courts Act does not infringe on the High Court's matrimonial jurisdiction established under the Letters Patent, and any transfer of cases depends on explicit legislative provisions.
Family Courts exercise civil jurisdiction for certain matters and criminal jurisdiction for proceedings under S.125 Cr.P.C., reflecting distinct legal frameworks.
A maintenance order under Sections 125 and 127 Cr.P.C can be enforced regardless of whether the respondent resides outside the jurisdiction of the court that issued the order.
Disputes regarding marital status and property rights of deceased spouses must be adjudicated in Family Court, as per Family Courts Act, ousting Civil Court jurisdiction.
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.