Blog

The Orissa high court has recently imposed costs of Rs. 25,000/- on a wife for suppressing the timeline fixed by the Supreme Court, while allowing transfer of the case, for disposal of the marital dispute by the Family Court, in the case of Mrs. Bahanta Durhy v Jeshmohan (W.P.(C) No. 2348 of 2023), passed by the Single Judge Bench of Justice Krushna Ram Mohapatra. 

Facts of the Case

The petitioner-wife filed the writ petition because she was upset by the judge’s decision to deny her request to have further sessions of reconciliation with her husband at the Family Court in Jharsuguda.

 In accordance with a Supreme Court directive, the matter at hand was moved from the Family Court in Jaipur, Rajasthan, and recorded on the file of the Judge in Jharsuguda. The petitioner said that once the case was brought before the Family Court in Jharsuguda, the petitioner really tried to find a resolution. However, the Family Court Judge did not treat the situation seriously. the parties through virtual mode or the timeline fixed by the Supreme Court for disposal of the matter. 

Observations & Judgment

The petitioner requested that the opposing party attend in person for conciliation, but that request was denied. As a result, the issue was posted for virtual conciliation, the court said. After that, on two consecutive occasions, none of the parties showed up virtually for a settlement. According to the petitioner, she was unable to attend the first date since she was not given the link. However, the Court disagreed, noting that she had not brought up such a concern in front of the Family Court. The Court further observed that the Family Court had previously attempted to mediate between the parties after reading the order sheet. However, the conciliator provided a report claiming that conciliation could not be undertaken since the petitioner was not present.

When dismissing the writ petition, the Court imposed a cost of Rs. 25,000/- on the petitioner, which was ordered to be paid to the opposing party (husband), expressing its deep regret over the petitioner’s attempt to obstruct the timeline set by the Apex Court for resolution of the matter.

“Prime Legal is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal falls into the category of the best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer”

JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY HARSHEEN KAUR LUTHRA, RGNUL, PUNJAB

“Click here to view your judgment”