Srinagar: On the issue of matrimonial disputes and ensuing claims of maintenance, the J&K High Court has impressed upon the Family Courts to persuade the parties in arriving at settlement, to avoid procrastination as well as undue haste under law.
In the case titled Afroza versus Mohammad Aslam Dar, Justice Javed Iqbal Wani held that under the Family Courts Act of 1984, the primary object and duty of Family Court is to make an endeavour and persuade the parties in arriving at a settlement in respect of the proceedings.
“For the purpose, the Family Court may follow any procedure which it deems appropriate and has also to adopt a balanced approach, avoiding procrastination as well as undue haste while considering the matter under the Act of 1984, and also has to be sensitive to the cause of the parties for which the Act has been enacted.”
Afrooza had filed maintenance proceedings against Mohammad Aslam Dar, her estranged husband, in 2019 before the Court of 2nd Additional Munsiff Srinagar. The petition claimed maintenance from her husband on the premise that she is his legally wedded wife and from the marriage a son was also born and that the respondent husband had failed to maintain the mother and the child.
The lady claimed that she was subjected to mental and physical torture, compelling her to leave the company of the respondent along with the minor child.
The court passed an order of interim maintenance in favour of the lady and her child to the tune of Rs 3,000 and Rs 1,500 respectively to be payable by her husband.
The maintenance proceedings were opposed by the husband. He alleged that the lady left his company and the matrimonial home and shifted to her parental home without any justification.
He also said that he is a carpet weaver labourer earning Rs 5, 000 per month and has out of these earnings not only to maintain his old-aged parents, but also his younger ailing brother.
The petitioner lady is a government employee drawing a handsome salary and is not dependent on husband’s maintenance, he pleaded.
The case was then transferred to the Court of Principal Sessions Judge, (the Family Court) in 2021.
The court dismissed the maintenance proceedings qua the wife and recalled the order of interim maintenance passed in her favour.
However, it enhanced the amount of maintenance to the child from Rs 1,500 to Rs 2,500.
The lady questioned the order qua the recalling of maintenance to her in the High Court.
Justice Javed Iqbal referred to certain cases adjudicated by the Supreme Court that have laid down criteria for determining the quantum of maintenance under Family Courts Act.
He said though the Family Court has taken into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case inasmuch as the evidence led by the parties before it; yet has failed to take into account the necessity of filing an affidavit of disclosure of assets and liabilities before it by the parties in order to advert to the matter in its true and correct perspective.
It has proceeded to decline the maintenance to petitioner lady while taking into consideration her employment, without having taken into cognizance the criteria laid down by the Apex Court for determining the entitlement and quantum of maintenance.
The matter thus, has not received appropriate consideration by the court, necessitating its remand back to the Family Court for its reconsideration, directed the judge.
Accordingly, the order insofar it declined the grant of maintenance to petitioner lady was set aside while upholding the award of maintenance granted to child.
