Karnataka High Court Imposes Heavy Cost for Delaying Divorce Proceedings
In a stern ruling, the Karnataka High Court has emphasized that court cases cannot be conducted based on the whims and fancies of applicants. The court rejected a woman's petition and imposed a cost of Rs 10,000 on her for dragging out divorce proceedings through numerous adjournments.
Background of the Case
The petitioner, a resident of Kanakapura, approached the High Court against a family court order dated November 28, 2025. This order had rejected her appeal for permission to cross-examine her husband in a divorce case initiated in 2019. The husband, who had filed for divorce, opposed her petition, stating that he had already paid Rs 27 lakh towards interim maintenance. He also noted that she had never sought restitution of conjugal rights.
Court's Observations on Delays
Justice Chillakur Sumalatha noted that since 2019, the woman had taken numerous adjournments on various grounds. Despite a High Court direction on July 29, 2024, to complete her husband's cross-examination in one stretch, she failed to do so. The court observed, "Neither the Family Courts Act nor the Code of Civil Procedure can be used to frustrate the proceedings or to cause inconvenience either to the other party or to the courts."
The judge further stated, "The flow of proceedings clearly depicts gross negligence on the part of the wife. The wife never chose to cooperate with the court. This case reveals a very sorry state of affairs. If litigation in Indian courts is carried out in the manner in which the proceedings in this case went on until now, no case will be disposed of within a decade. Breach of the mandate of law is clearly found."
Appreciation for Family Court and Final Ruling
The High Court commended the family court for its conduct of the proceedings, stating that it was highly appreciable. On the merits of the case, the court found no grounds to interfere with the impugned order. Justice Sumalatha remarked, "Having perceived the fact that the wife intentionally dragged on the matter and not only wasted the time of the family court but also this court, [it] considers disposing of this writ petition by imposing heavy costs upon the petitioner."
The court directed the family court to continue the proceedings and dispose of the case promptly. Additionally, it ruled that the wife would only be allowed to participate in the proceedings after producing sufficient proof of payment of the Rs 10,000 cost.
Implications for Legal Proceedings
This ruling underscores the judiciary's commitment to preventing abuse of legal processes and ensuring timely disposal of cases. It serves as a warning against frivolous adjournments that delay justice and burden the court system.
