From recent news below, it is clear that in case of marriage and residence of a couple abroad, when jurisdiction of foreign country’s courts apply in matter of family law; it is incorrect on part of an Indian court to try out a family law matter.
But following marital discord, Shweta came to Delhi in June 2008 with their child and decided against returning to her “abusive” husband. In Delhi, she filed a custody petition before a city court to get the child’s custody. Sunil, on the other hand, filed a child custody petition in the Superior Court of California in August 2008.
A confounding situation arose when the Californian court passed an interim order, granting custody of the child to Sunil, while the Delhi court passed the same order in favour of Shweta. The Delhi court also dismissed Sunil’s plea that it had no jurisdiction to try the case.
Sunil then moved the Delhi High Court against the lower court order. The High Court restrained the city court from trying the case because it had no jurisdiction. Justice Dhingra also observed that similar cases are pending in various courts in India. He said lower courts should follow the Supreme Court’s ruling that says the future residence or future plans of a parent can not rob the right of the original court of jurisdiction.