BASANTI JENA Vs. PRATAP CHANDRA JENA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the writ application and the Civil Appeal are interlinked as they are directed against the same order passed by the learned Judge, Family Court Cuttack, dated 10 -1 -1996 in Misc. Case No. 173 of 1995 arising out of Civil Proceeding No. 111 of 1994 rejecting the application filed under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (in short, 'the Act') The application was primarily rejected on the ground that it was not Verified in the proper manner.

(2.) MR . K.N. Jena, learned counsel appearing for Basanti Jena, the applicant before the learned Judge, Family Court, submitted that the insistence was on signing of the application on each page though the verification had been signed by the applicant, and each page of the application was signed by the advocate appearing for the applicant in the case. Additionally an affidavit had been filed by the applicant to the effect that she had filed the application and had authorised the advocate to sign the application on each page. Mr. Mahadev Misra, learned counsel appearing for Pratap Chandra Jena, respondent in the Civil Appeal and opp. party No. 1 in the writ application contended that the verification was not in the proper manner and signing by the advocate and filing of the affidavit were of no consequence. The learned counsel appearing in the Family Courts to act as an amicus curiae under Section 13 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 (in short, 'the Family Act'), and his signing is of no consequence.

(3.) IT is to be noted that the parties before the Family Court are not permitted to be assisted by lawyers as of right and are required to appear in person. Engagement of lawyers has to be made in terms of Section 13 of the Family Act. Keeping in view the object for which the Family Act has been enacted and non -availability of assistance by advocates, too much of stress on technicalities would frustrate the purpose of enactment of the statute. If there is substantial compliance. Family Courts should liberally act. It would depend on the nature of the compliance required and nature of defect. In the peculiar circumstances of the case, we are satisfied that the rejection of the application was not proper. The impugned order is, therefore, set aside. The learned Judge, Family Court shall consider the application on merit afresh. The writ application and the Civil Appeal are accordingly disposed of.