Can Family Courts hear the original petitions of Domestic Violence Act?
Advocate Ashok Kini M., appointed as Amicus Curiae by the Kerala High Court, stated that an original petition for reliefs under Sections 18-22 of the DV Act, 2005, can be filed before the Family Court.
In George Varghese v. Treesa Sebastian & Ors.
The case involves original divorce petitions filed by the husband and wife in Family Courts at Alappuzha and Ernakulam due to marital issues. The wife also filed separate petitions under DV Act, Guardians and Wards Act, and for maintenance in the Ernakulam Family Court. The husband argued against Ernakulam’s jurisdiction, but his objections were rejected. He approached the High Court, claiming that only Judicial Magistrates, per Section 12, can hear petitions under the Domestic Violence Act.
According to Section 12 of the DV Act, 2005, an aggrieved person or a designated individual can apply to a Magistrate for reliefs outlined in Sections 18-22 of the Act, which include Protection Orders, Residence Orders, Custody Orders, Compensation Orders, and monetary reliefs. The Amicus Curiae asserts that although these proceedings occur before a Magistrate, the reliefs (excluding punishments) are civil in nature. Considering Section 9 of the CPC (civil court jurisdiction) and Section 36 of the DV Act (supplementary to other laws), Advocate Kini suggests that civil courts, under Section 9 CPC, can grant civil-type reliefs, including those outlined in the DV Act. These reliefs under Sections 18-22 of the DV Act align with the categories specified in Section 7 of the Family Courts Act, within the purview of Family Courts’ jurisdiction.
The Amicus Curiae contends that the reliefs in DV Act’s Sections 18 and 19 are akin to injunction orders, aligning with Family Courts Act’s criteria. Sections 20 and 21 can be linked to maintenance or guardianship proceedings, and compensation is feasible via Family Court under Section 22 of DV Act.
Whether a party to the marriage liable for the violation of settlement agreement during the proceedings against each other?
The Delhi High Court in ANURAG GOEL v. CHHAVI AGARWAL 2023 held a wife guilty of contempt of court for wilfully violating a settlement agreement with her husband and disobeying the undertaking to abide by the same given to the family court.
Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora imposed a penalty of Rs. 2,000 on the wife and also sentenced her to one month of simple imprisonment, considering that she “deliberately, wilfully, intentionally and defiantly” disobeyed the undertaking despite various opportunities were granted to her, “only with an intent to enhance her financial settlement with the husband.”
“The Court has fined the Respondent ₹2,000/- and sentenced them to one month of simple imprisonment, with an additional 15 days if the fine is not paid. The sentence is suspended for two weeks to allow the wife a chance to remedy the contempt.”
“In the opinion of this Court, if this stand of the Respondent is accepted it will erode the faith of the general public in the legal proceedings and to the undertakings given to the Court. The Respondent’s pleadings and her stand shows scant regard for the undertaking given to the Court to abide by the terms and conditions of the settlement agreement,” the court observed.
Delhi High Court has ordered National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) to pay Rs 1204 crore Arbitral Award to Reliance Infrastructure.
The Delhi High Court has instructed NHAI to pay Rs 1204 crore to TK Toll Road Private Limited (TKTR), a subsidiary of Reliance Infrastructure Limited (R-Infra).
R-Infra had got an arbitral award of Rs 1200 crore in its favour in October 2022. TKTR had filed a petition in the Delhi HC for execution of this arbitration award
The court has allowed TKTR to withdraw the funds using a Bank Guarantee. R-Infra plans to use this amount to reduce its debt. The court ruling follows an arbitration related to the Trichy and Karur highway development project, awarded by NHAI to R-Infra in 2007 under a build operate and transfer (BOT)basis. Delays in project completion led to Arbitration proceedings.