Rajasthan HC Asks Family Courts To Avoid Unnecessary Adjournments, Observe S.21B Hindu Marriage Act Which Encourages Day-To-Day Trial

The Rajasthan High Court has asked the family courts to sparingly grant adjournments during the pendency of divorce petitions, to realise the objective behind Section 21B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

The single-judge bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand noted that disposal of divorce matters shouldn't be delayed unnecessarily and the proceedings should be concluded as expeditiously as possible.

“Let a copy of this order be sent to all Family Courts through Registrar General with directions to comply with the provisions contained under Section 21-B of the Act of 1955 while deciding all matrimonial matters arising out of the provisions of the Act of 1955”, the bench sitting Jaipur issued appropriate directions.

The writ petition was originally filed seeking the court's interference for the expeditious disposal of a petition for dissolution of marriage under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The case was filed before a Family Court at Jaipur in 2022.

The mandatory provision in Section 21B stipulates the disposal of divorce petitions within six months from the date of service of notice of the petition on the respondent. It also prescribes that trial should be continued from day to day until its conclusion, unless the court finds the adjournment of the trial to be necessary for reasons to be recorded.

In the instant case, the reply had already been filed by the respondent and the case was posted for settlement of issues.

Before urging the family courts to ensure expeditious disposal, the High Court also emphasised that statutory provisions mandating disposal of cases within a specified time- period are usually held to be discretionary. The court acknowledged that there are already many matrimonial disputes pending before the family courts

Referring to High Court Bar Association Allahabad v. State of UP & Ors, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 177, Justice Dhand pointed out that Supreme Court & high Courts are required to ordinarily refrain from fixing time-bound schedules for case disposal in other courts. Justice Dhand iterated the reasoning given in the High Court Bar Association that the situation at the grassroots level is best known to the judges of the concerned courts.

“…. Therefore, the issue of giving out-of-turn priority to certain cases should be best left to the concerned Courts. The orders fixing the outer limit for the disposal of cases should be passed only in exceptional circumstances to meet extraordinary situations”, a five-judge bench led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, alongside Justices Abhay S Oka, JB Pardiwala, Pankaj Mithal, and Manoj Misra had held in February.

Moreover, not every litigant can approach constitutional courts and such litigants can't be allowed to take undue advantage by securing an order for out-of-turn disposal of their case over all the other litigants who are also waiting before the concerned court, Justice Dhand added by referring to the apex court judgment.

However, considering the mandate of Section 21B, the court directed the concerned family court to expedite the proceedings of the divorce petition pending before it.

Advocate Sikander Ali Chopdar appeared for the petitioner-husband.

Case No: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3261/2024

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Raj) 49

Click Here To Read/ Download Order