The Delhi High Court has recently asked its administrative side to give details of pendency of cases in various family courts.
A bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Mini Pushkarna observed that there is humongous work in the family courts and judges are overburdened.
The court heard a petition seeking direction to expedite the hearing of cases pending before the family courts in Delhi and to direct that notices/summons be issued for date returnable within 3-4 weeks.
The petition also sought a direction to the authorities to amend the Delhi Family Court Rules, 1996, and frame effective rules for proper functioning of family courts and speedy and time bound disposal of disputes.
The bench agreed with the counsel for petitioner Ishan Taneja that priority has to be given to fresh matters relating to the family disputes.
Taneja, in his petition filed through advocates Abhinav Bajaj and Prateek Goswami, highlighted the issue of inordinate delay in disposal of family/matrimonial disputes pending before the various family courts in Delhi.
The bench stated, “You are right, if a person has filed a divorce case when he is 33-35 years old, he should be able to get the decree by the time he turns 37-38 years of age, so that he is able to start a new life. If you get the divorce decree when you are in your 50s or 60s, it becomes difficult to start a new life.”
Justice Manmohan gave an example of Mumbai and stated that they have a large number of judges in family courts. The court was informed by the counsel representing the high court’s administrative side that presently there are 28 family courts in Delhi.
The lawyer submitted, a proposal for 10 more family courts has been sent to the Delhi government for which the decision is awaited.
The court asked the petitioner’s counsel to place their suggestions in the matter in 3 weeks.
It also asked the high court’s administrative side to place before the bench the data of present pendency of the family courts and listed the matter for further hearing on January 18 next year.
The petition stated in view of the nature of lis (suit) adjudicated before family courts, inordinate and unnecessary delays are required to be curtailed to effectively administer justice in family disputes.
The plea stated, “No amount of money can compensate for the delay in adjudication of issues involving personal and family matters. Right to access to justice of parties include right to adjudication of family disputes in a timely manner.
Disputes relating to marriage, divorce, guardianship are required to be decided within reasonable time and any inordinate or long delay in deciding such issues may make the relief infructuous or inconsequential.”
It added that looking at the huge pendency and the pace at which the matters are adjudicated before the family courts, necessary directions are required to be passed for speedy disposal of cases.
The petition stated, “Conduct of the parties, efforts of settlement and conciliation at different stages and multiplicity of proceedings also add up to the delay in early disposal of the cases. As such effort should be made to streamline appearance of parties, completion of pleadings and settlement of issues within a reasonable period of 2-3 months from institution of the case. However, the same can only be achieved by having proper rules regarding functioning of Family Courts and of practice and procedure in place.”
