IN THE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA, AGARTALA
T. VAIPHEI AND S.C. DAS, JJ.
Smt. Dipika Sharma (Chakraborty), W/o Shri Sudip Sharma - Petitioner
Vrs.
Shri Sudip Sharma, S/o Shri Dinesh Sharma and Ors. - Respondent
TRP (C) 9, 10, 11, 13, 14 OF 2015, TRP (C) 1 OF 2016
Decided On : 16-09-2016
Transfer Petitions - Jurisdiction of Family Court - Family Courts Act, 1984, Section 7, Section 8, Section 10, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Section 24 - The court discussed the jurisdiction of Family Courts, the procedure to be followed in Family Courts, and the power of the High Court to transfer proceedings from Family Court to District Court or vice versa. The court held that the High Court has the power to transfer matrimonial proceedings from Family Court to District Court or vice versa, and also has the power to transfer proceedings under Chapter IX of the Cr.P.C. from the Family Court to the Magisterial Court and vice versa.
Fact of the Case:
The court considered transfer petitions seeking to transfer proceedings from Family Court to District Court or vice versa under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the High Court has the power to transfer matrimonial proceedings from Family Court to District Court or vice versa, and also has the power to transfer proceedings under Chapter IX of the Cr.P.C. from the Family Court to the Magisterial Court and vice versa.
Issues: The issues were whether petitions can be transferred from the Court of the District Judge to the Family Court in another District and whether the proceedings pending before the Family Court in one District can be transferred to a District Judge in another District where there is no Family Court.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the High Court has the power to transfer matrimonial proceedings from Family Court to District Court or vice versa, and also has the power to transfer proceedings under Chapter IX of the Cr.P.C. from the Family Court to the Magisterial Court and vice versa.
Final Decision: The court answered the reference made by the Single Bench accordingly and held that the transfer petitions seeking transfer of the proceedings from Family Court to District Court or from District Court to Family Court are maintainable and the High Court has the power to entertain such petitions for transfer.
S.C. Das, J.
By a common order dated 17.11.2015, passed in TRP(C) 9/2015; TRP(C) 10/2015 and TRP(C) 11/2015, Chief Justice of this Court, while sitting in Single Bench, formulated the following two issues for decision by a Division Bench. The issues were—
1. Whether petitions can be transferred from the Court of the District Judge to the Family Court in another District?
2. Whether the proceedings pending before the Family Court in one District can be transferred to a District Judge in another District where there is no Family Court?
2. Subsequently three other transfer petitions i.e. TRP(C) 13/2015; TRP(C) 14/2015 and TRP(C) 1/2016, wherein also common questions were involved, tagged together with the aforesaid three transfer petitions for decision on the aforesaid two issues.
3. We have heard learned counsel of the parties on the above mentioned two issues at length.
4. In the State of Tripura, there are five judicial districts. Family Courts have been established in the head quarter of three Judicial Districts i.e. at Agartala in the West Tripura District, Kailashahar in the present Unakoti District and Udaipur in the present Gomati District. In the rest two Judicial Districts i.e. North Tripura and South Tripura, no Family court has yet been established. The local jurisdiction of the respective Family Courts set up at Agartala, Udaipur and Kailashahar has been notified.
5. The jurisdiction of the Family Court has been prescribed in Section 7 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 which reads thus—
“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 (relating to order for maintenance of wife, children and parents) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974); and
(b) such other jurisdiction as may be conferred on it by any other enactment.”
6. As prescribed under Section 8 of the Family Courts Act, the jurisdiction of the District Court and the subordinate civil Court was excluded in respect of the matters in which the Family Court was vested with the jurisdiction. Section 8 reads as follows:-
“8. Exclusion of jurisdiction and pending proceedings—
Where a Family Court has been established for any area,-
(a) no district court or any subordinate civil court referred to in sub-section (1) of section 7 shall, in relation to such area, have or exercise any jurisdiction in respect of any suit or pr
AI
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
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.