Mere Allegations of Harassment Do Not Constitute Abetment of Suicide: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Bail to Wife in Matrimonial Suicide Case 'Convenience Of Wife Not A Thumb Rule, But Custody Of Minor Child Is A Weighing Aspect': Punjab & Haryana HC Transfers Divorce Case To Rohtak MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court Judicial Review Is Not A Substitute For Examiner’s Judgment: Delhi High Court Rejects DJSE Candidate’s Plea Over Alteration of Marks Part-Payments Extend Limitation - Each Payment Revives Limitation: Delhi High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Cooperative Society Is A “Veritable Party” To Arbitration Clause In Flat Agreements, Temple Trust Entitled To Arbitrate As Non-Signatory: Bombay High Court State Government Cannot Review Its Own Revisional Orders Under Section 41(3): Allahabad High Court Affirms Legal Bar on Successive Reviews When Several Issues Arise, Courts Must Answer Each With Reasons: Supreme Court Automatic Retention Trumps Lessee Tag: Calcutta High Court Declares Saregama India ‘Raiyat’, Directs Reconsideration of Land Conversion Application Recovery of Valid Ticket Raises Presumption of Bona Fide Travel – Burden Shifts to Railways: Delhi High Court Restores Railway Accident Claim Failure to Frame Issue on Limitation Vitiates Award of Compensation Under Telegraph Act: Gauhati High Court Sets Aside Order, Remands Matter Compassionate Appointment Is Not a Heritable Right: Gujarat High Court Rejects 9-Year Delayed Claim, Orders Re-Issuance of ₹4 Lakh Compensation Court Cannot Rewrite Contracts to Suit Contractor’s Convenience: Kerala High Court Upholds Termination of Road Work Under Risk and Cost Clause Post-Bail Conduct Is Irrelevant in Appeal Against Grant of Bail: Supreme Court Clarifies Crucial Distinction Between Appeal and Cancellation Granting Anticipatory Bail to a Long-Absconding Accused Makes a Mockery of the Judicial Process: Supreme Court Cracks Down on Pre-Arrest Bail in Murder Case Recognition as an Intangible Asset Does Not Confer Ownership: Supreme Court Draws a Sharp Line Between Accounting Entries and Property Rights IBC Cannot Be the Guiding Principle for Restructuring the Ownership and Control of Spectrum: Supreme Court Reasserts Public Trust Over Natural Resources Courts Cannot Convict First and Search for Law Later: Supreme Court Faults Prosecution for Ignoring Statutory Foundation in Cement Case When the Law Itself Stood Withdrawn, How Could Its Violation Survive?: Supreme Court Quashes 1994 Cement Conviction Under E.C. Act Ten Years Means Ten Years – Not a Day Less: Supreme Court Refuses to Dilute Statutory Experience Requirement for SET Exemption SET in Malayalam Cannot Qualify You to Teach Economics: Supreme Court Upholds Subject-Specific Eligibility for HSST Appointments Outsourcing Cannot Become A Tool To Defeat Regularization: Supreme Court On Perennial Nature Of Government Work Once Similarly Placed Workers Were Regularized, Denial to Others Is Discrimination: Supreme Court Directs Regularization of Income Tax Daily-Wage Workers Right To Form Association Is Protected — But Not A Right To Run It Free From Regulation: Supreme Court Recalibrates Article 19 In Sports Governance S. Nithya Cannot Be Transplanted Into Cricket: Supreme Court Shields District Cricket Bodies From Judicially Imposed Structural Overhaul Will | Propounder Must Dispel Every Suspicious Circumstance — Failure Is Fatal: : Punjab & Haryana High Court Electronic Evidence Authenticity Jeopardized by Unexplained Delay and Procedural Omissions: MP High Court Rejects Belated 65B Application Not Answering to the Questions of the IO Would Not Ipso Facto Mean There Is Non-Cooperation: Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail Undertaking to Satisfy Award Is Not Waiver of Appeal: Supreme Court Restores Insurer’s Statutory Right

Karnataka High Court: "Life is too short to be little" - Expeditious Resolution of Matrimonial Cases Upheld as a Constitutional Right

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Karnataka High Court, presided over by the Hon'ble Mr. Justice Krishna S Dixit, delivered a landmark judgement on Writ Petition No. 14769 of 2023 (GM-FC) on July 26, 2023. The case brought to light the distressing issue of prolonged pendency of matrimonial cases in courts, and the court's verdict emphasized the constitutional guarantee of the right to speedy justice under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Representing the petitioner, Sri. N Rajeev, Advocate Sri. Basavaraj R Bannur ardently presented the case before the court. The petitioner sought the dissolution/nullity of marriage with the respondent, Smt. C. Deepa, invoking Section 13(1) (IA) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

Justice Dixit's judgment eloquently highlighted the urgency of resolving matrimonial disputes expeditiously. Quoting the renowned British historian, Thomas Carlyle, the court reiterated, "Life is too short to be little." The court observed that undue delays in matrimonial cases have a severe impact on the lives of the parties involved, emphasizing the need to grant them an opportunity to move on and rebuild their lives.

Recognizing the paramount importance of timely justice, the court dispensed with notice to the respondent, assuring her of a fair opportunity to participate in the trial. The judgment directed the Family Court Judge to expedite the trial and disposal of the seven-year-old case within an outer limit of three months.

The verdict also addressed the wider issue of expediting similar cases in the future, as the court instructed the Registrar General to circulate the judgment among concerned circles. This move aims to prevent litigants from unnecessarily seeking directions for the expeditious disposal of their cases.

The ruling of the Karnataka High Court sets a precedent for other courts across the country to consider the urgency of matrimonial cases and uphold the right to speedy justice. This landmark decision reaffirms the principle that courts should make all efforts to promptly resolve matrimonial disputes to enable the parties involved to move forward with their lives.

 Date of Decision:26th July, 2023

SRI. N RAJEEV vs  SMT. C. DEEPA,

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/NRajeev_Vs_CDeepa_28July23_Karnt.HC_.pdf"]

Latest Legal News