Merely Making a Claim in Written Statement Does Not Suffice for Counterclaim: Patna HC Upholds Dismissal of Stridhan Return Claim

In a significant ruling, the High Court of Judicature at Patna upheld the dismissal of a counterclaim for the return of stridhan in a matrimonial dispute. The judgment delivered by Justice Arun Kumar Jha in the case of Sima Devi @ Sima Kumari vs. Manoranjan Singh, emphasized the necessity of adhering to legal formats in asserting claims.

The core legal issue addressed in this judgment was whether a claim made in a written statement by a respondent in a matrimonial case can be treated as a valid counterclaim for the return of stridhan, without adhering to the prescribed legal format.

Facts and Issues: Sima Devi, the petitioner, appealed against the Family Court's dismissal of her counterclaim for the return of stridhan, which she had included in her written statement in a matrimonial dispute. The High Court was tasked with determining whether her claim constituted a valid counterclaim under the relevant procedural and matrimonial laws.

Misapplication of Procedural Law: The Court observed that under Order VIII Rule 6A of the CPC, a counterclaim should be treated as a plaint and must follow the rules applicable to plaints, including those in Order VII Rule 1 of the CPC. The petitioner's claim in her written statement did not conform to these requirements.

Jurisdiction of Family Courts: While Family Courts can adjudicate property disputes in matrimonial cases, they are limited to specific reliefs under the Hindu Marriage Act. The counterclaim for the return of gift articles in matrimonial proceedings was not maintainable under these provisions.

Limitations of Counterclaims in Family Law: The Court held that under Section 23A of the Hindu Marriage Act, counterclaims are limited to specific reliefs under Sections 9 to 13 of the Act. Claims for the return of gift articles do not fall within this scope.

Procedural Formalities: The judgment highlighted the importance of procedural formalities in legal claims, stating that they facilitate the administration of justice and ensure fairness to all parties.

The High Court dismissed the Civil Miscellaneous Petition, upholding the Family Court's decision due to non-compliance with the required legal format and content for a counterclaim. However, the petitioner was granted liberty to pursue her rights in an appropriate legal forum.

Date of Decision: April 3, 2024

Sima Devi @ Sima Kumari vs. Manoranjan Singh