Divorce Final, But Property Rights Pending? Family Court Jurisdiction Continues: Himachal Pradesh HC

The Himachal Pradesh High Court, in a recent judgment, clarified the Family Courts’ jurisdiction in family dispute matters. It clarified an important question that typically arises in divorce cases, that is, the settlement of her property. The ambiguities often leave the former wife in a jurisdictional vacuum regarding the return of stridhan and her other gifts. In such a case, the court clarified that procedural technicalities should not be a hurdle for women to claim rights to their property.

The court clarified that family courts have jurisdiction to hear property claims of women who have been issued a divorce decree.

Case Background

The petitioner (wife) filed an application for divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) and return of her stridhan and gifts under Section 27 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The family court granted her an ex parte decree of divorce in her favour on January 31, 2018, but it did not decide the other application simultaneously.

In October 2022, the Principal Judge of the family court of Hamirpur rejected her application on the basis that once a divorce decree is passed without provision of property disposal, no independent order can be made by the family court. It held that such an application fell outside the jurisdiction of family courts.  

The wife then approached the Himachal Pradesh High Court.

Arguments

The appellant's (former wife) counsel challenged this dismissal of the property claim application, arguing that the family courts have jurisdiction for such matters under the law. The counsel also provided a reference to the Supreme Court's previous judgments, according to which the property disputes between spouses are triable by family courts.

The respondent’s (former husband) counsel, on the other hand, argued that the family court was correct in rejecting the property claim application. It is not maintainable after the main matrimonial petition is closed, the counsel argued.

Court Observation

The bench, comprising Justice Vivek Singh Thakur and Justice Romesh Verma, noted the purpose of the Family Court Act, which is to provide exclusive jurisdiction to matrimonial matters, including property disputes.

It referred to Sections 7 and 8 of the Act and noted, “Explanation (c) of Section 7(i) of Family Court Act unambiguously provides that Family Court shall have jurisdiction to adjudicate a suit or proceedings between the parties to a marriage with respect to property of the parties or of either of them.”

“Section 8 excludes the jurisdiction of all other Courts, including Civil Courts related to the matters triable by Family Court, wherever a Family Court has been established. Section 20 gives overriding effect to the provisions of the Family Court Act, notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith, contained in any other law, for the time being in force.”

It further observed that Section 20 of the Act provides the Family Court Act with an “overriding effect” over any inconsistent provisions in any other law.

The court also noted Section 27 of the Hindu Marriage Act to clarify the family courts’ jurisdiction. Per Section 27, which is about the disposal of property, “In any proceeding under this Act, the court may make such provisions in the decree as it deems just and proper with respect to any property presented, at or about the time of marriage, which may belong jointly to both the husband and the wife.”

The court said that Section 27 of the Hindu Marriage Act uses the word "may,” which means that it does not bar courts from entertaining property claims independently after passing a divorce decree.

It said, “It is apparent that irrespective of any provision in any other law including the Hindu Marriage Act, the Family Court has a jurisdiction to adjudicate a suit and proceedings related to property dispute related to property of the parties or of either of them, between the parties to a marriage,” and emphasised on the harmonious construction between the provisions of Hindu Marriage Act and Family Court Act.

Court Judgment

The high court set aside the rejection order and sent the matter back to the family court. It directed the lower court to hear the matter and grant an opportunity to the parties to provide evidence regarding the disputed property.

The court ruled that any decree that will be passed regarding the property will be treated as part of the original divorce decree.