HC asks octogenarian couple to amicably resolve dispute, install CCTV in home

Mumbai: The Bombay high court recently heard a peculiar case wherein an octogenarian couple married for over 60 years approached it for relief after filing cases against each other in the family court

Mumbai: The Bombay high court recently heard a peculiar case wherein an octogenarian couple married for over 60 years approached it for relief after filing cases against each other in the family court.

HT Image

Considering their age, the HC asked the counsels to explore an amicable resolution to the issue. Both the parties have agreed to take the help of a senior priest of the community for mediation.

Meanwhile, as the 86-year-old husband claimed that he had apprehensions over his safety, the HC directed the court receiver to install a CCTV system in the house of the couple.

The single judge bench of justice N J Jamadar which was hearing an interim application in a suit initiated by the 86-year-old man was informed by advocates Sahil Sayed and Bahraiz Irani that their client was seeking directions for reinstallation of the CCTV system in the 3-BHK flat which he and his 84-year-old wife occupy in Kalina.

The bench was informed that the man had filed for divorce, while the woman had filed a case of domestic violence. However, after the divorce petition and domestic violence cases were dismissed by the respective courts, appeals were filed in the HC which are pending hearing.

The advocates submitted that as their client had recently undergone a bypass surgery, he was apprehensive of his safety and hence wanted a previous order of the HC to have the hall and kitchen of their residence under CCTV surveillance to continue.

The bench was informed that through a previous order, the HC had appointed a court receiver and directed him to install a CCTV system in the house in 2015. However, the wife had disconnected the same by damaging the wires and the same had to be reinstalled.

The bench was further told that in December, 2022, another bench had directed appointment of a mediator and a report for that was to be submitted before the court on February 6, 2023.

Justice Jamadar then directed the court receiver to reinstall CCTV and directed the man to bear the costs, and posted the hearing of compliance of the order to February 20.

The case

The man had filed a suit in the HC in 2011 seeking a declaration that the 3-BHK house in Kalina belonged to him as it was purchased with the money he had earned and received as post-retirement benefits, but had got it registered in his wife’s name. The man was prompted to file the suit as his then 72-year-old wife had asked him to vacate the house. The wife had argued that the man was an alcoholic, womaniser and wife beater, and hence had asked him to vacate the house. The man was supported by his daughter. A bench of justice D Y Chandrachud (now Chief Justice of India) had directed the wife to allow the man to stay in a room in the flat and also allowed him access to the kitchen.

Installation of CCTV

In 2015, after hearing the grievance of the man that his wife refused to comply with the 2011 order, justice S J Kathawalla had directed the court receiver to install a CCTV system in the house and keep the recording in his custody. The arrangement continued for a couple of years but then the wife disconnected the system. Despite the contempt of court, the HC had refrained from initiating action against the woman and directed the court receiver to reinstall the CCTV system in 2018.

Mediation

Considering the advanced age of the couple, the division bench of justice K R Shriram and justice Kamal Khata which was hearing the family court appeal of the man through a December 21, 2022 order had directed appointment of a mediator. Later, the court was informed that a senior priest had been appointed for mediation. The court had directed the mediator to submit a report by February 6 and placed the hearing of the appeal on February 8.

Wife’s application

In 2022, the wife filed an interim application seeking modification of the 2011 order and evicting the husband and disconnecting the CCTV system. However, while the interim application was pending hearing, the woman again disconnected the CCTV system, while the husband was undergoing treatment at Lilavati Hospital. On his return from the hospital, she refused him entry into the house, however, after the HC intervened, she had to grant him entry. The HC also allowed a medical representative to visit the house to attend to the man’s medical needs.