HC judge moots time limit to dispose of marital disputes

CHENNAI: The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court recommended a consideration to the Chief Justice to fix a time limit to dispose of the cases related to marital disputes to curb the consumption of large hours of the family courts.

Dismissing an appeal preferred by a man challenging a divorce order, Justice RMT Teekaa Raman decried that it has become the “habit or trend” before the family court that after the trial on a divorce petition instituted by a spouse seeking divorce reaches the fag end of the proceedings, the other would file a fresh petition for restitution of conjugal rights.

“Certain period of limitation has to be fixed to curb this evil designed practice before the family courts, which is consuming large hours of the court and also causing innumerable years of delay in disposal of the original petition,” the judge said.

The High Court Rules Committee (civil) shall look into the matter and prescribe a limitation period in the event of any application being filed by one of the spouses to the marriage and that summons has been served on the opposite party, shall commence the point of limitation for filing the counter relief, he added in the judgment.

The judge also directed the registry to place a copy of the order for the consideration of Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala for referring the matter to the Rules Committee (Civil) for consideration.

The plea came before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court after the appellant challenged the order of the family court, Tiruchy, which allowed the divorce petition initiated by his former wife. The woman moved the family court seeking divorce from him, stating that he misrepresented his educational qualification and also demanded dowry.

In 2015, at the end of the trial of the divorce petition, he filed a petition seeking the restitution of conjugal rights. However, the family court allowed the divorce petition filed by the woman.

Aggrieved by this, the man moved a petition in the Madurai Bench and contended that his wife, a judicial officer, misused her power and instituted a false complaint against him. He also alleged that he was subjected to cruelty and humiliation.

After the perusal of the submissions, the judge wrote that the husband wanted to cover up all his misdeeds by falsely alleging that the wife, being a judicial officer, assumed the upper hand and misused her post. The judge said the court found the appeal lacked merit and disposed of the appeal.