Though by virtue of Section 17-A of The Family Courts Act, 1964 Family Court was vested with the power to strike off the defence of the defendant and decree the suit on failure by him to........

2024 CLC 863
WP 38-14
BASHIR MASIH VS SUNEELA NADEEM ETC

Though by virtue of Section 17-A of The Family Courts Act, 1964 Family Court was vested with the power to strike off the defence of the defendant and decree the suit on failure by him to pay the interim maintenance in terms of order of the Court but it will not equip the Court with unfettered powers to proceed mechanically. In no circumstances, a Court can abdicate its prime duty to foster justice as per canons of law. It is trite law that Court cannot proceed in vacuum and exercise judicial powers arbitrarily and whimsically. Before invoking a penal provision like section 17-A of "The Act" the Court was supposed to consider as to whether it was vested with the power to pass the order of interim maintenance, which was not done at all.

Though by virtue of Section 17-A of The Family Courts Act, 1964 Family Court was vested with the power to strike off the defence of the defendant and decree the suit on failure by him to pay the interim maintenance in terms of order of the Court but it will not equip the Court with unfettered powers to proceed mechanically. In no circumstances, a Court can abdicate its prime duty to foster justice as per canons of law. It is trite law that Court cannot proceed in vacuum and exercise judicial powers arbitrarily and whimsically. Before invoking a penal provision like section 17-A of "The Act" the Court was supposed to consider as to whether it was vested with the power to pass the order of interim maintenance, which was not done at all.