Indian Legal System > Civil Laws > Family Laws > The Family Courts Act, 1984 > Jurisdiction of Family Courts
In the last article, we have seen that under Section 3 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 the State must establish a Family Court for every area in the State comprising a city or town whose population exceeds one million in consultation with the High Court by giving notification in Official Gazette. Similarly, the State Government, after consultation with the High Court, must specify, by notification, the local limits of the area to which the jurisdiction of a Family Court shall extend and may, at any time, increase, reduce or alter such limits. State Government can establish Family Court for other areas in the State as the State Government may deem necessary. In this article, we shall discuss the jurisdiction of Family Courts.
Section 7 of the Act lays down that Family Courts shall have and exercise all the jurisdiction which is exercised by any District Court or any subordinate civil court under any law for the time being in force in respect of suits and proceedings relating to the following matters, namely:
(a) A suit or proceeding between the parties to a marriage for a decree of nullity of marriage (that is, declaring the marriage to be null and void or, as the case may be, annulling the marriage) or restitution of conjugal rights or judicial separation or dissolution of marriage;
(b) A suit or proceeding for a declaration as to the validity of a marriage or as to the matrimonial status of any person;
(c) A suit or proceeding between the parties to a marriage with respect to the property of the parties or of either of them;
(d) A suit or proceeding for an order or injunction in circumstances arising out of a marital relationship;
(e) A suit or proceeding for a declaration as to the legitimacy of any person;
(f) A suit or proceeding for maintenance; and
(g) A suit or proceeding in relation to the guardianship of the person or the custody of, or access to, any minor.
In addition to the above, a Family Court also has jurisdiction which can be exercised by a Magistrate of the First Class under Ch. IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in matters relating to maintenance of wives, children, and parents.
It is to be noted that the family court can entertain the petition relating to the property dispute between the parties to a marriage only, but it has no jurisdiction to entertain the applications in case involving a dispute between the brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers etc. concerning property.
Case Laws:
In Sangeeta B Kadam v Balakrishna Ramchandra Kadam, AIR 2005 Bom 262 case, the Court held that although the dowry and related issues are outside the purview of the Family Courts, it has wider jurisdiction to decide the wife’s claim to Stridhana under Section 7 (1) (c) of the Family Courts Act.
In Jacob Kuruvila and others v Merly Jacob and others, 2010(1) KLT 503 and Muhammad Davood and another v Hafsath and another AIR 2010 Ker. 21 cases the Courts held that the transaction arose in circumstances arising out of the marital relationship between the parties, claim for recovery of money, gold ornaments given by the parents of the wife or its value will be within the jurisdiction of the Family Court.
In Srihari v Sukunda, 2001 (1) KLT SN 101 case, the Court held that the Family Court has no jurisdiction in suits for partition between the family members and also held that matters of serious economic consequences that affect the family, such as testamentary matters, are not within the purview of the Family Courts.
In Hemant Kumar Aagarval v Lakshmi Devi AIR 2004 All 126 case, the Court held that though, the Family Court has no jurisdiction in suits for partition between the family members, joint property presented at or about the time of marriage has been treated as exclusive properties of the spouses and disputes relating to such properties have been brought well within the jurisdiction of the Family Courts.
In Shiny v George and another, AIR 1997 Ker, 231 case the Court observed that “When a wife sues her husband for recovery of her property or which she claims to be her property, obviously the suit could be tried and disposed of only by the Family Court and when in such a suit the wife is obliged to add a close relative of the husband or even a stranger on the allegation that the husband had made over the property to that close relative or stranger, it will be too much to hold that the jurisdiction of the Family Court is ousted to deal with the claim of the plaintiff in view of the mere presence of the stranger or the close relative of the husband.” And held that presence of a stranger in the suit ipso facto does not take away the jurisdiction of the Family Courts to try the dispute between the husband and wife with regard to property.
In Syamala Devi v Saraladevi, AIR 2009 Ker. 138 case, the Court held that the suits for declaration as to the marital and paternal status and suit or proceeding arising out of marital relationship (but not necessarily between spouses) will be within the ambit of the Family Courts.
In Leby Issac v Leena M. Ninan, 6 2005(3) KLT 665 case, it was made clear by the Court that “the expression ‘in circumstances arising out of marital relationship’ thus means not only those occurrences which transpired during marital life, but those also include such circumstances which led to the marriage, which developed thereafter, which took place during marital life, which resulted in breaking down of marriage and also those which ‘closely’ followed as a consequence of all these.”
In Sumita Singh v Kumar Sanjay and Anr, AIR 2002 SC 396, the Court held that Family Courts do have jurisdiction to decide disputes relating to properties claimed by the parties irrespective of whether the marriage is subsisting or not and such practices will be for ensuring maximum welfare of society and dignity of women.
In Vimalashram Gharkul v Smt Jyoti Banon Joseph, 2007 (1) KLT SN13 case, the Court held that the Family Courts have no jurisdiction to appoint a guardian or a manager in respect of minor’s property but it can appoint the guardian of a minor.
Previous Topic: Establishment of Family Courts