In Brief
The petitioner sought transfer of matrimonial and child custody proceedings from Kerala to Tamil Nadu. The respondent cited Krishna Veni Nagam, suggesting video conferencing as an alternative to transfer. The Supreme Court held that video conferencing in family disputes is fundamentally incompatible with the statutory mandate under the Family Courts Act 1984 and Hindu Marriage Act 1955. The Court emphasised that reconciliation, mediation by counsellors, and in camera proceedings are central to family law, requiring physical presence and strict confidentiality. Video conferencing compromises both confidentiality (as footage becomes a record) and the effectiveness of reconciliation efforts. The Court distinguished Krishna Veni Nagam, finding it lacked necessary information about family law procedures, and directed the matter to a larger Bench for reconsideration.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.