Family Courts must comply with stay orders to prevent unjust decisions; non-compliance can lead to contempt proceedings.

O R D E R

This contempt petition has been filed consequent to an order of this Court dated 06.02.2017 in transfer C.M.P. No. 108 of 2017 and C.M.P. No. 1044 of 2017.

2. The transfer C.M.P. No. 108 of 2017 had been filed by the present contempt petitioner seeking to withdraw the HMOP 1014 of 2016 which was pending on the file of the Family Court at Madurai and transfer the same to the Family Court at Chennai.

3. In C.M.P. No. 1044 of 2017, this Court had granted an order of interim stay from further proceeding with H.M.O.P. No. 1014 of 2016. This order was passed on 06.02.2017. A report had been received from the Family Court at Madurai that this particular order was received by the Family Court at Madurai on 23.02.2017.

4. By all fairness, the said Family Court should therefore have withheld from proceeding further with HMOP No. 1014 of 2016. The contempt has been filed stating that the respondent had withheld this particular order, and had obtained an order of exparte divorce on 23.06.2017. It is stated that soon after that particular date, he had also got married.

5. It was under those circumstances, this contempt petition had been filed in the year 2018 since the petitioner was left high and dry.

Though there was an order of stay in HMOP 1014 of 2016, the Family Court had proceeded with the said original petition and had granted decree to the disadvantage of the present petitioner herein.

6. This Court had directed both the parties to tender evidence before the learned Master. During the evidence, it had transpired that the private notice issued consequent to the grant of stay of further proceeding in HMOP No. 1014 of 2016 had been received by the mother of the respondent and it is contended that this would be effective service on the respondent and that he had withheld this particular information from the District Court at Madurai. In fact, it is alleged that there has been a collusion between the Court and the respondent leading to passing of order granting exparte decree of divorce. That might be a little too far fetched but certainly, the Family Court at Madurai should have exercised caution particularly when there has been stay granted by this Court and stay order has been communicated and received by the Family Court at Madurai on 23.02.2017.

7. The Registry may obtain necessary explanation from the then District Judge, Family Court at Madurai who had proceeded with hearing in HMOP No. 1014 of 2016 though the order of stay had been received by the Court on 23.02.2017. Such explanation may be put up for consideration through circulation.

8. The learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the petitioner had been fighting for justice for such a long time and to her dismay she found that the respondent had contracted a second marriage and also has a child living.

9. In the year 2022, the petitioner had also married again and she also has a child again. This one factor which must play on the mind of the learned counsel to urge that the petitioner should move forward with her life. As a matter of fact, the very fact that she married again would show that she had accepted to the order of divorce granted in HMOP 1014 of 2016 as otherwise her marriage would also be void at the instance as one of the parties.

10. It is stated that she had filed an application to set aside the exparte decree after the matter had been transferred to the Family Court at Chennai, but that the application is still kept pending without any progress. A plea is also made on behalf of the petitioner that some of her articles are still with the respondent and that the same should be returned back. But however, the learned counsel for the respondent stated that no such articles are now available with the respondent. Making an enquiry into that aspect would be like searching for a needle in a haystack as the articles even if they had been with the respondent would have merged with other articles of the respondent and his wife.

11. As a matter of fact, a list is