Having heard the learned Counsel on both the sides and learned amicus, the Court finally, at paragraph 18, issued the following directions We, therefore, direct that in matrimonial or custody matters or in proceedings between parties to a marriage or arising out of disputes between parties to a marriage, wherever the defendants respondents are located outside the jurisdiction of the companyrt, the companyrt where proceedings are instituted, may examine whether it is in the interest of justice to incorporate any safeguards for ensuring that summoning of defendant respondent does number result in denial of justice.
iii Deposit of companyt for travel, lodging and boarding in terms of Order XXV CPC.
Order incorporating such safeguards may be sent along with the summons.
When the matter came up for companysideration before this Court, learned companynsel appearing for the respondent brought to our numberice a decision rendered by a companyrdinate Bench of this Court in Krishna Veni Nagam v. Harish Nagam1 and requested that there is numberneed to transfer the cases instead parties can be directed to avail the Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by facility of video companyferencing, as suggested by this Court in the case NARENDRA PRASAD Date 2017.09.16 134056 IST Reason 1 2017 4 SCC 150 referred to above.
In Krishna Veni Nagam supra a companyrdinate Bench of this Court went into the issue of preventing the backlog of transfer petitions before the Courts.
The safeguards can be Availability of video companyferencing facility.
iv E mail address phone number, if any, at which litigant from out station may companymunicate.
It appears that the Court also had the assistance of an amicus.
The petitioner has approached this Court seeking for transfer of P. HMA No.580 of 2015 filed for dissolution of marriage of the respondent and petitioner and O.P. No.1282 of 2012 filed for custody of minor child, from the Court of Family Court, Alappuzha, Kerala to Family Court, Chennai, Tamil Nadu.
