Family courts must become litigant-friendly, not adopt rigid practices: Madras High Court

Madras High Court. File
| Photo Credit: K. Pichumani

Family courts must remember that “courts are for litigants and litigants are not for courts,” the Madras High Court has said. It disapproved of the rigid practices followed by most family courts, thereby putting the litigants to much inconvenience.

Justice V. Lakshminarayanan has laid down elaborate guidelines to be followed by family courts across the State. He ordered they need not insist on physical appearance of the parties during every hearing and instead permit them to appear virtually.

The judge took serious note of complaints regarding the family court procedures causing great anguish to the litigants by not letting them be represented by lawyers/power of attorneys and insisting on personal appearance even for making copy applications.

It was also brought to his notice that there were eight family courts for the city of Chennai alone and around 800 to 1,500 litigants visit the family court complex everyday, thereby leading to overcrowding of the building.

After recording the travails faced by the litigants, the judge said, the Family Courts Act of 1984 was enacted for speedy settlement of matrimonial disputes by simplifying the procedures. Section 13 of the Act states no party would be entitled, as a matter of right, to be represented by an advocate.

The intention behind the legal provision was to avoid the family court proceedings from becoming adversarial and prevent the possiblity of lawyers prolonging the cases. However, it only regulates and does not completely prohibit the appearance of lawyers before the family courts, the judge pointed out.

“Even the most educated and privileged litigants may not necessarily be adept with the legal procedure and formalities,” the judge said and clarified that litigants could engage lawyers to draft the petitions and also to represent them before the family courts after obtaining permission from the court concerned.

Justice Lakshminarayanan went on to state: “The insistence on personal attendance of the litigants for every hearing is incongruent with the spirit of the Act and the object it seeks to achieve.” Therefore, he impressed upon the need for the family courts to adopt a liberal approach while considering applications for appointment of power of attorneys and for vitual appearance.

“Family Court was established as a separate institution to be more empathetic to the physical, emotional, and financial distress of the litigants. Even for the Family Courts, the personal attendance of the litigants during every hearing, including the procedural hearings, would tend to contribute to their inefficiency and delay in proceedings as the attendance of the litigants cannot always be guaranteed and would lead to more disorder within the court premises,” the judge observed.

“It is also inhumane to presume that the litigants are placed in such circumstances that they are always available at the beck and call of the Family Court. There are a variety of reasons that could disable a party from personally attending the court proceedings ranging from professional commitments, health issues, overseas travel, etc. In such circumstances, the Family Court would not be justified in directing the parties to personally appear before it for any such direction would become simply adverse to the litigants. Again to reiterate, the litigants are not for the courts, but the courts are for the litigants,” the judge added.