The Delhi High Court in the case X v. Y observed and has stated that the time period of filing written statement which being in the realm of procedural law, can be extended under the Family Courts Act, 1984 and if the applicant spells out exceptional circumstances or disability faced which is by him or her in filing the same. The Division bench comprising of Justice V Kameswar Rao and Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta in the case observed and has stated that the time schedule for filing the written statement needs to be followed to deal with the family disputes in an expeditious manner. The court in the case stated that the departure should be as an exception for the reasons which is to be assigned by the respondent and in case grave injustice would be incurred, if the opportunity for filing the written statement is denied. The court in the case observed that for the for the purpose of ‘procedure’ and for the ‘purpose of evidence’, the Family Court adopts a less formal procedure and is free to evolve its own procedure, although the Section 10 of the Family Courts Act makes the procedure which is being laid down under Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, as applicable to the proceedings. In the present case, the court was dealing with the wife’s appeal challenging the order of the family court which dismissed her Review Application for taking the written statement on record, in a divorce case. The court observed that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on November, 2005 and two children were born out of the wedlock in the year 2008 and 2013. Therefore, the husband filed the divorce petition under Section 13(1) (ia) and 13(1)(iii) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in the year 2016. It has been noted by the bench that when the application of wife’s for taking the written statement on record came up for consideration before the family court, the said matter was put up for settlement or reply as well as consideration of the said application. Further, the bench noted that the wife took a specific stand that she had changed her counsel and the new counsel had inspected the judicial file of the matter and it was revealed that no such issues had been framed and the matter was fixed for evidence. It has also been stated by the court that the appellant was unaware that the written statement had not been filed and taken on record. The bench in the case observed that no doubt, the Courts must act stringently for ensuring that the timelines as set out procedurally are met to avoid any delays but at the same time, it cannot be ignored that the future of the wife in the case, along with two minor daughters, was at stake. The court stated that if the valuable right to defence by way of filing of written statement of the wife was closed, grave injustice may incur to her. The court in the case stated that it cannot be ignored that the appellant was under a great mental stress as it has been pointed out that one of the daughters is in the custody of the respondent. Thus, the said case is still posted for cross-examination of respondent and no prejudice is likely to be caused in case written statement is permitted to be taken on record and matter is proceeded with, after framing of issues. The court in the case observed and has set aside the impugned order and has allowed taking of wife’s written statement on record subject to cost for an amount of Rs.3,000 to be paid by her to the husband. The court while considering the facts and circumstances of the case stated that the same would ensure the proper and effective adjudication of the petition filed by the respondent and the order passed by learned Judge, Family Court declining to take the written statement on record is accordingly set aside.
Accordingly, the court allowed the appeal.
