Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from a Transfer Petition (C) No.1252 of 2016 filed by the Petitioner seeking to transfer HMA No.487 of 2015 from the Family Court in Gautambudh Nagar, U.P. to the Family Court in Saket, New Delhi. The Supreme Court dismissed the transfer petition, reasoning that the Petitioner would not face serious inconvenience traveling between the two locations. The court also directed that the trial be conducted through video conferencing. Subsequently, the Petitioner filed a Review Petition (C) No.472 of 2018, arguing that there was no video conferencing facility at the Gautambudh Nagar District Courts and citing a prior judgment that prohibited video conferencing in matrimonial matters. The court acknowledged the ongoing pandemic, which had halted physical court proceedings, and noted that all court activities were being conducted via video conferencing. Despite the previous judgment, the court directed the Family Court in Gautambudh Nagar to conduct the trial through video conferencing due to the exceptional circumstances. Ultimately, the Review Petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Family Law - Transfer of Matrimonial Cases - Dismissal of Transfer Petition - Transfer Petition (C) No.1252 of 2016 - The court dismissed the transfer petition on grounds of convenience and directed the trial to be conducted via video conferencing despite previous restrictions due to the pandemic. Held that the current circumstances necessitated the use of video conferencing for the trial (Paras 1-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial can be conducted through video conferencing in matrimonial matters despite previous judgments prohibiting it.
Final Decision
The Review Petition was dismissed, and the Family Court was directed to conduct the trial through video conferencing.
Law Points
- Transfer of cases
- Video conferencing in matrimonial matters
- Review petitions
