Dear Sir, 23/02/2016
This is generally happen in alL the cases that wife keep pending cases months together and therefore this judgment is very important for all of us.
CAN ANYBODY PLEASE POST THE FULL JUDGMENT FOR THE GENERAL SUFFERER OR ATLEAST INFORM THE NAME OF THE PARTIES,CASE NO AND DATE OF JUDGMENT
THE DETAILS IS AS UNDER:-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One side keeping matri case pending is harassment to other. Its a punishment to the other side. Madras HC !
IF your wife is delaying the matrimonial case, Use this Madras HC judgement for speedy closure. In this case a husband approached the HC who has ordered closure of the case by FAMILY COURT within 2 months
“…. Noting that the family proceedings had been prolonged, longer than a regular civil suit, the judge said, “Keeping the case pending by one of the litigant, amounts to harassment to the other side. It is deliberately resorted to as a method of punishment to the other side.”
She said, “Emotional explosion is involved in almost all cases relating to matrimonial disputes. The interest of children is involved in several cases and pending dispute shatters mental peace. The future planning is kept under suspension. Procreation may become an impossibility because of the advancement of age. The impatient litigant may resort to illegal marriage.”
>>>>>>>> Article >>>>>>>>>>>>
Dispose of divorce cases fast: High Court
TNN | Feb 21, 2016, 09.06 AM IST
Chennai: Neither being able to ‘consummate’ his marriage for 13 years nor obtain divorce on the ground of cruelty for denial of conjugal rights, a man moved Madras high court for speedy end to the ordeal, prompting the court to repeat its oft-quoted phrase ‘Justice delayed is justice denied.’
Justice S Vimala, expressing distress at inordinate delay in disposal of divorce cases in family courts, said such delays in settling matrimonial disputes would emotionally disturb parties who would undergo ‘relentless worries’. Calling it the “silent cry of a husband, who is allegedly deprived of the conjugal relationship right from the date of marriage”, the judge then directed the third additional family court to dispose of the matter in two months.
Meenakshi Sundaram had moved the court to declare the marriage between him and his wife as a nullity, saying the wife was disinclined to live with him and that she refused to consummate the marriage. Noting that she refused to render conjugal company, which amounted to mental cruelty, he sought divorce on the ground of cruelty. Justice Vimala said it was a well-known fact that pendency of family court cases was mounting, bringing the judges under enormous pressure. “Despite the family court judges burning the midnight oil, they are not able to clear the pendency, because of the attitude of parties, procedural flexibility not being utilized, parties not willing to settle the matter at the earliest point of time and pre-litigation settlement not being utilized.
Noting that the family proceedings had been prolonged, longer than a regular civil suit, the judge said, “Keeping the case pending by one of the litigant, amounts to harassment to the other side. It is deliberately resorted to as a method of punishment to the other side.”
She said, “Emotional explosion is involved in almost all cases relating to matrimonial disputes. The interest of children is involved in several cases and pending dispute shatters mental peace. The future planning is kept under suspension. Procreation may become an impossibility because of the advancement of age. The impatient litigant may resort to illegal marriage.”
It is for the judges of family courts to find out ways and means to dispose of the cases quickly. “Bottlenecks in the system and the handicap for judges, if any, should be discussed in judicial academies and solutions in terms of either change in law or change in procedure or change in attitude of the parties must emerge,” Justice Vimala said. She urged family courts to make use of alternative disputes resolution (ADR) methods such as conciliation, mediation and lok adalat, and said, “There is a duty enjoined on family courts to make efforts for settlement at the first instance, wherever it is possible to do so, consistent with the nature and circumstance of the case. Settlement brings finality to the litigation and peace to the family.”
source
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com
/city/
chennai/
