New Delhi, Matrimonial disputes require conciliatory procedure to bring about a settlement between husband and wife and mediation has played a very important role in settling such issues, the Delhi High Court has said.
Noting that there are large number of matrimonial disputes in the country, it said the courts now are normally of the view that an endeavour should be made to promote conciliation and secure speedy settlement in these matters.
“As matrimonial disputes are mainly between husband and wife and personal matters are involved in such disputes, so it requires conciliatory procedure to bring a settlement between them. Nowadays, mediation has played a very important role in settling the disputes, especially matrimonial disputes and has yielded good results,” Justice P S Teji said.
The court noted that the 59th report of the Law Commission had emphasized that while dealing with disputes concerning the family, “the court ought to adopt an approach radically different from that adopted in ordinary civil proceedings and it should make reasonable efforts at settlement before commencement of the trial.”
“Further it is also the constitutional mandate for speedy disposal of such disputes and to grant quick justice to the litigants. But our courts are already over-burdened due to pendency of large number of cases because of which it becomes difficult for speedy disposal of matrimonial disputes alone,” the court observed.
The order came on a petition filed by a man and his family members seeking quashing of an FIR lodged against them in July 2013 by his wife for alleged offences under sections 498 A (subjecting a married woman to cruelty), 406 (criminal breach of trust) and 34 (common intention) of the IPC.
The court allowed the petition and ordered quashing of FIR observing that the matrimonial dispute between the parties was mutually and amicably settled.
The decision came after the couple told the court that the dispute between them was amicably settled and they have started living together. The woman also said she had no objection if the FIR was quashed.
According to the FIR, the marriage was solemnised in April 2007 and the in-laws of the woman had started demanding more dowry from her.
She had also alleged that she was scolded in abusive and filthy language, while her father-in-law in January 2013 had even asked her to leave the matrimonial house.