Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 — Ss. 12, 18–22, 26, 28, 29, 31, 33 — Nature of proceedings and forum — Effect of transfer to Family Court under S.24 CPC — Held: Reliefs under Ss.19–22 are predominantly civil; once clubbed and tried by Family Court, they are subsumed in Family Court’s civil jurisdiction.

advocatemmmohan

Family Courts Act, 1984 — S. 19(1), (2), (5) — Appeal — Maintainability — Common judgment of Family Court deciding (i) divorce petition under Special Marriage Act, and (ii) transferred DV Act application — Whether reliefs under DV Act part are appealable under S.19 F.C. Act or only by criminal revision/S.29 DV Act — Held: Appeal under S.19 maintainable for entire common order, including DV reliefs.

Proceedings under S.12 DV Act originally before JMFC were transferred under S.24 CPC to Family Court and clubbed with divorce petition. After transfer, Family Court tried both matters together, framed separate issues, recorded common evidence and passed a composite judgment granting (a) divorce, and (b) reliefs under Ss.19–22 DV Act.
Held, once DV proceedings are transferred and tried by Family Court, orders thereon are orders of the Family Court, not orders of a Magistrate under S.12 DV Act; consequently, challenge lies by Family Court Appeal under S.19(1) and not by Criminal Revision or appeal under S.29 DV Act. It is impermissible to bifurcate the common judgment and treat DV portion as revisable only.

Nandkishor Pralhad Vyawahare v. Mangala, (2018) 3 Mah LJ 913 (FB), applied.
Mr Santosh Machindra Mulik v. Mrs Mohini Mithu Choudhari, 15-11-2019 (Bom), followed.

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 — Ss. 12, 18–22, 26, 28, 29, 31, 33 — Nature of proceedings and forum — Effect of transfer to Family Court under S.24 CPC — Held: Reliefs under Ss.19–22 are predominantly civil; once clubbed and tried by Family Court, they are subsumed in Family Court’s civil jurisdiction.

Following Full Bench in Nandkishor Pralhad Vyawahare, Court reiterates that:
• Proceedings under S.12 seeking reliefs under Ss.18–22 are predominantly civil in nature;
• Criminal procedure is applied largely to make civil remedies effective;
• Only breach proceedings under Ss.31, 33 acquire criminal character.

In present case, no relief under Ss.31 or 33 was claimed or granted; Family Court only granted civil-type reliefs (residence, injunction, maintenance, damages, etc.) under Ss.19–22. Hence, the DV component remained civil and squarely within Family Court’s jurisdiction once transferred and clubbed.

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — S.24 — Transfer — Domestic Violence proceedings before JMFC transferred to Family Court — Legal effect — Held: After transfer and clubbing, proceedings lose separate procedural identity and are tried as one composite family cause.

Under S.24 CPC, High Court transferred DV proceedings from JMFC to Family Court to be tried along with divorce petition, directing the Family Court to proceed from the stage already reached and to rely on evidence recorded before the Magistrate. Parties participated before Family Court without challenge to the transfer order.
Held, upon such transfer and common trial:
• DV proceedings “subsumed” into Family Court proceedings;
• Final orders “acquired the character” of Family Court orders for all purposes;
• It would be “fallacious and myopic” to treat DV portion as a separate criminal order amenable only to revision.

Domestic Violence Act, 2005 — S.26 — Reliefs in other legal proceedings — Interplay with Family Courts Act — Held: When DV reliefs are claimed and granted within Family Court proceedings, appeal remedy is governed by Family Courts Act, not S.29 DV Act.

S.26 DV Act permits reliefs under Ss.18–22 to be sought in any legal proceedings before Civil/Family/Criminal Court. Where such reliefs are adjudicated by Family Court within its jurisdiction under S.7 F.C. Act (maintenance, property, injunction, custody etc.), the appellate structure of the Family Courts Act governs; S.29 DV Act (appeal to Sessions from “order of Magistrate”) is inapplicable.

Family Courts Act, 1984 — S.7, S.10 — Jurisdiction and procedure — Clubbed matrimonial and DV reliefs — Held: Family Court rightly exercised composite jurisdiction; all such civil-type reliefs are amenable to Family Court appellate regime.

Family Court, being deemed a Civil Court under S.10(1), can adjudicate:
• Divorce and allied reliefs under Special Marriage Act, and
• Property, maintenance, residence, injunction, and custody issues (Explanation (c), (d), (f), (g) to S.7).

Where DV reliefs overlap with matrimonial/property/maintenance issues and are tried together on common evidence, they validly fall within Family Court’s umbrella jurisdiction.

Result

Preliminary objection to maintainability of Family Court Appeal rejected.
Held, Family Court Appeal under S.19 is maintainable against the entire common judgment, including reliefs granted on the transferred DV application under Ss.19–22 DV Act. Matter directed to be listed for hearing on merits.