Proceeding For Declaration Regarding Validity Of Marriage & Matrimonial Status Is Within Exclusive Jurisdiction Of Family Court: Orissa High Court

The High Court was considering a second appeal in a case involving the disbursement of pensionary benefits to the defendant who claimed to be the legally wedded wife of a deceased employee.

The Single Bench of Justice Sashikanta Mishra observed, “Therefore, in view of Clause (a) of Section 8, the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division at Deogarh lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the matter any further. Further, as per the provision under Clause (c), the suit ought to have been transferred to the Family Court. In the case of Balaram Yadav vrs. Fulmaniya Yadav it was held that a proceeding for a declaration as to the validity of both marriage and matrimonial status of a person is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Family Court. Further, it makes no difference as to whether the relief claimed is affirmative or negative. What is important is the declaration regarding the matrimonial status.”

Advocate S. Jena represented the Petitioner while Advocate B. S. Dash represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

The suit in question was filed by the plaintiff seeking a declaration that she is the only legally married wife of one Srimukha Naik with a negative declaration that first defendant is not the legally wedded wife of Srimukha. A further plea was raised to direct the Bank to disburse all the pensionary benefits in her favour. The man, Srimukha, died in the year 2021, leaving behind the plaintiff and his children, one of whom namely, Arati Naik, was impleaded as the second defendant in the suit. It was alleged that Srimukha Naik was never married to the first defendant, and as such, she was not entitled to a family pension.

The defendants contested the suit, and the first Defendant claimed to be the first wife of Srimukha Naik. She was declared as a nominee by her husband at the time of preparation of pension papers. It was alleged that her husband, Srimukha had an illicit relationship with the plaintiff. Further, she received the pensionary benefits from the third defendant-bank as per the direction of the Accountant-General of Odisha.

The Trial Court dismissed the suit. The plaintiff carried the matter to appeal and the same was allowed in part by declaring that the plaintiff is the legally married wife of Srimukha Naik. The first defendant thus approached the High Court by filing the instant Second Appeal to decide the substantial question of law whether both the Courts below were correct in entertaining the suit and the appeal arising therefrom in view of Section 7 of the Family Courts Act read with Section 8 of C.P.C.

Reasoning

The Bench noted that the suit being one for a declaration as to the validity of marriage between the plaintiff and Srimukha Naik as also for negative declaration regarding the marital status of defendant No.1 vis-a-vis Srimukha Naik, the dispute squarely fell within the purview of Clause-(b). It was noticed that the matter which ought to have been dealt with by the Family Court after its establishment and functioning, was entertained by the Civil Court.

It was explained by the Bench that Clause-(a) of the provision bars the jurisdiction of the Civil Court in respect of any matter in respect of any suit or proceeding of the nature referred to in the explanation to that subsection. Clause-(c) makes it clear that any suit or proceeding of the nature referred to in explanation to Subsection (1) of Section 7, which is pending immediately before the establishment of the Family Court before any district Court or subordinate Court over which a Family Court alone has jurisdiction on the date on which it is established shall stand transferred to the Family Court.

“As already stated, the Family Court at Deogarh started functioning w.e.f. 23.12.2021. Therefore, in view of Clause (a) of Section 8, the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division at Deogarh lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the matter any further”, the Bench said.

“It is surprising that even after establishment and functioning of the Family Court, the trial Court not only proceeded with the suit but also decided it finally. Even more surprisingly, the First Appellate Court entertained the appeal arising out of the judgment and the decree of the trial Court and reversed the same”, the Bench said. “It is reiterated that the Civil Court shall have no jurisdiction to entertain a suit where the same is expressly barred under any law. In the instant case, the jurisdiction of the Civil Court to adjudicate the dispute is expressly barred by the provisions of Sections 7 and 8 of the Family Courts Act”, it further held.

As per the Bench, the First Appellate Court committed illegality in entertaining the appeal arising out of the judgment passed by the trial Court, which itself was a nullity. Allowing the appeal, the Bench set aside the impugned judgments and ordered, “The trial Court is directed to immediately transmit the records to the Family Court at Deogarh for hearing of the matter afresh. In doing so, the Family Court shall not be influenced by the judgments passed by the trial Court as well as the First Appellate Court in any manner. Further, the suit being of the year 2021, the Family Court shall endeavour to dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within eight months from the date of receipt of records.”

Cause Title: Kshirbati @ Kharabati Naik v. Premsila Naik & Anr (Case No.: RSA No. 122 of 2024)

Appearance:

Petitioner: Advocate S. Jena

Respondent: Advocate B. S. Dash

Click here to read/download Order