{"id":185994,"date":"2018-02-06T11:43:12","date_gmt":"2018-02-06T06:13:12","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=185994"},"modified":"2018-02-06T11:43:12","modified_gmt":"2018-02-06T06:13:12","slug":"petitioner-allowed-appear-skype-family-court","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/06\/petitioner-allowed-appear-skype-family-court\/","title":{"rendered":"Petitioner allowed to appear through \u2018Skype\u2019 in Family Court"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Karnataka High Court:<\/strong> A Single Judge Bench comprising of A.S. Bopanna, J., decided a set of writ petitions filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, wherein the petitioner husband; residing abroad, was granted permission to appear in the Court through Skype.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The matter related to a marriage dispute between the petitioner-husband and the respondent-wife. The matter was initially filed before the Family Court by the wife against the husband. The petitioner-husband in the instant petition prayed to quash the order of the Family Court whereby the petitioner was directed to appear in person before the Court in Bangalore. The petitioner submitted that he was residing in the USA and had difficulties in traveling to India and appearing before the Family Court. During the pendency of instant petition, a compromise petition was filed by both the parties before the Court whereby they had agreed to dissolve the marriage. The said petition was signed by father of the petitioner-husband as his power of attorney. Hence for reaching finality in the matter, petitioner\u2019s appearance before the Court was necessary to ascertain that the joint petition was filed with his concurrence.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The High Court referred to an earlier decided writ petition, wherein a detailed consideration regarding leave to be granted to appear through Skype had already been adverted to. The Court observed that in appropriate circumstances where both the parties agreed on a compromise and when it is only for the purpose of satisfaction of the Family Court that the compromise has been entered, it is permissible that such appearance through Skype would be sufficient. The Court found that in the instant case, the respondent-wife had no objection to such prayer and hence considering that the petitioner-husband was in the USA, the Court thought it fit to grant permission to appear through Skype. Accordingly, the petition was allowed and the impugned order of the Family Court directing the petitioner to appear in person was set aside. [Rahul Chandra Kone v. Jahanvi, WP Nos. 24580 of 2015, order dated 30.01.2018]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Karnataka High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of A.S. Bopanna, J., decided a set of writ petitions filed under Articles 226 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":91,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[27874,2864,27884],"class_list":["post-185994","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-appearance","tag-family_court","tag-skype"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Petitioner allowed to appear through \u2018Skype\u2019 in Family Court | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/06\/petitioner-allowed-appear-skype-family-court\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Petitioner allowed to appear through \u2018Skype\u2019 in Family Court\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Karnataka High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of A.S. Bopanna, J., decided a set of writ petitions filed under Articles 226\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/06\/petitioner-allowed-appear-skype-family-court\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2018-02-06T06:13:12+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/02\/IMG_3499-e1487871967209.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Saba\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Saba\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/06\/petitioner-allowed-appear-skype-family-court\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/06\/petitioner-allowed-appear-skype-family-court\/\",\"name\":\"Petitioner allowed to appear through \u2018Skype\u2019 in Family Court | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2018-02-06T06:13:12+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/06\/petitioner-allowed-appear-skype-family-court\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/06\/petitioner-allowed-appear-skype-family-court\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/06\/petitioner-allowed-appear-skype-family-court\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Petitioner allowed to appear through \u2018Skype\u2019 in Family Court\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785\",\"name\":\"Saba\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Saba\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_2\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Petitioner allowed to appear through \u2018Skype\u2019 in Family Court | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/06\/petitioner-allowed-appear-skype-family-court\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Petitioner allowed to appear through \u2018Skype\u2019 in Family Court","og_description":"Karnataka High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of A.S. Bopanna, J., decided a set of writ petitions filed under Articles 226","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/06\/petitioner-allowed-appear-skype-family-court\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2018-02-06T06:13:12+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/02\/IMG_3499-e1487871967209.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Saba","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Saba","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/06\/petitioner-allowed-appear-skype-family-court\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/06\/petitioner-allowed-appear-skype-family-court\/","name":"Petitioner allowed to appear through \u2018Skype\u2019 in Family Court | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2018-02-06T06:13:12+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/06\/petitioner-allowed-appear-skype-family-court\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/06\/petitioner-allowed-appear-skype-family-court\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/06\/petitioner-allowed-appear-skype-family-court\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Petitioner allowed to appear through \u2018Skype\u2019 in Family Court"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785","name":"Saba","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Saba"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_2\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":202223,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/09\/25\/law-permitting-parties-to-appear-through-attorneys-doesnt-bind-court-to-act-mechanically-parties-directed-to-appear-in-person\/","url_meta":{"origin":185994,"position":0},"title":"Law permitting parties to appear through attorneys doesn\u2019t bind Court to act mechanically, parties directed to appear in person","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"September 25, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J. dismissed a petition impugning the order of Family Court whereby the petitioner and his wife were directed to appear in person before the Court. The petitioner and his wife were residents of USA. They applied for a\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":255167,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/10\/05\/convenience-of-the-wife-is-to-be-preferred-over-the-convenience-of-the-husband-in-transfer-petitions-relating-to-matrimonial-disputes\/","url_meta":{"origin":185994,"position":1},"title":"Raj HC | Convenience of the wife is to be preferred over the convenience of the husband in transfer petitions relating to matrimonial disputes","author":"Editor","date":"October 5, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Rajasthan High Court: Chandra Kumar Songara J. allowed the petition of the wife-petitioner on the grounds of having a child, no source of income and residing with her parents. The instant transfer application was filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 i.e. CPC on behalf of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":261308,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/08\/261308\/","url_meta":{"origin":185994,"position":2},"title":"Tri HC \u2502Whether maintenance granted to the wife under S. 125 CrPC can be cancelled in view of husband\u2019s obtaining a decree for restitution of conjugal rights and wife\u2019s refusal for the same?","author":"Editor","date":"February 8, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Tripura High Court: S.G. Chattopadhyay, J., decided on a petition which was filed by the petitioner challenging order passed by the Additional Judge, Family Court which stated that the petitioner was not entitled to any maintenance allowance under section 125 Cr.P.C from her husband in view of her refusal to\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":246092,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/25\/maintenance-5\/","url_meta":{"origin":185994,"position":3},"title":"Del HC | It is for the wife to establish alleged source of husband&#8217;s income; Husband would have paid maintenance rather than going jail: HC reduces interim maintenance to wife and son","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"March 25, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: Subramonium Prasad, J., partly allowed a revision petition filed by the husband and reduced the amount of interim maintenance granted to the respondent-wife and son from Rs 12,500 per month to Rs 4,500 per month. While so deciding, the Court held that: \"It is trite law that\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":223159,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/12\/11\/bom-hc-husband-cannot-be-ordered-to-procreate-during-pendency-of-petition-for-restitution-of-conjugal-rights-family-courts-conclusion-a-shock-to-judicial-conscience\/","url_meta":{"origin":185994,"position":4},"title":"Bom HC | Husband cannot be ordered to procreate during pendency of petition for restitution of conjugal rights; Family Court\u2019s conclusion a shock to judicial conscience\u00a0","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"December 11, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court: Ravindra V. Ghuge, J., while allowing the present petition and setting aside the impugned order of the Family Court, stated that: \u201cSeeking directions to forcibly have a second child during the pendency of a petition seeking restitution of conjugal rights, would be detrimental to the mental growth\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":255790,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/10\/18\/divorce-by-mutual-consent\/","url_meta":{"origin":185994,"position":5},"title":"Divorce by Mutual Consent: Family Court dissolves marriage where husband and wife had difference of opinions and incompatible temperament","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"October 18, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Family Court Pune: M.R. Kale, J., granted a decree of divorce by mutual consent to a couple who due to difference of opinion and incompatibility of their temperament could not live together. Instant petition was filed for dissolving the marriage by a decree of divorce by mutual consent under Section\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/divorce1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/divorce1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/divorce1.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/divorce1.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/divorce1.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/185994","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/91"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=185994"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/185994\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=185994"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=185994"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=185994"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}