Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Anjali Brahmawar Chauhan vs Navin Chauhan

Supreme Court22 January 2021Vineet Saran · L. Nageswara Rao · S.A. Bobde

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

Where all court proceedings are being conducted through video conferencing due to extraordinary circumstances such as a pandemic that has stopped physical functioning of courts, video conferencing may be directed in matrimonial matters as an exception to the general rule that video conferencing is not permissible in such matters, notwithstanding the judgment in Santhini vs. Vijaya Venketesh.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

NON-REPORTABLEIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIAINHERENT JURISDICTION

Review Petition (C) No.472 of 2018 In Transfer Petition (C) No.1252 of 2016

Anjali Brahmawar Chauhan .... Petitioner Versus

Navin Chauhan …. Respondent (s)

O R D E R

1. The Petitioner preferred Transfer Petition (C) No.1252 of

2016 seeking transfer of HMA No.487 of 2015 filed by the

Respondent from the Principal Judge, Family Court, District

Gautambudh Nagar, U.P. to the Court of Principal Judge, Family

Court, Saket District, New Delhi. The Transfer Petition was

dismissed taking into account the fact that no serious

inconvenience will be caused to the Petitioner for travelling

between Gautambudh Nagar, U.P. to Saket, New Delhi. While

dismissing the Transfer Petition, this Court directed the trial to

be conducted at Gautambudh Nagar, Family Court through

video conferencing.

2. This Review Petition has been filed by the Petitioner on

Signature Not Verifiedthe ground that there is no video conferencing facility at Digitally signed by Sanjay Kumar Date: 2021.01.22

Gautambudh Nagar, District Courts. Another ground in the 17:07:25 IST Reason:

Review Petition is that video conferencing is not permissible in

1 | Page matrimonial matters in accordance with the judgment of this

Court date 09.10.2017 in a case titled “Santhini vs. Vijaya

Venketesh”.

3. Notice was issued in the Review Petition on 20.03.2018.

Due to the ongoing pandemic, physical functioning of the

Courts has been stopped since March, 2020. Proceedings in all

Courts are being conducted only through video conferencing.

In the normal course we would not have directed video

conferencing in respect of matrimonial matters as per the

judgment of this Court mentioned above. However, in the

present situation where all proceedings are conducted through

video conferencing, we direct the Family Court, District

Gautambudh Nagar, U.P. to conduct the trial through video

conferencing.

4. The Review Petition is dismissed.

………....................CJI.

[S.A. BOBDE]

..........……...................J. [L. NAGESWARA RAO]

….……………………...J. [VINEET SARAN]

New Delhi January 22, 2021

2 | Page

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free