What are the types of exculpatory defenses/evidence in Family Courts?
Question although very basic, I am confused on following................
I understand that, there are two ways of defense against 'cause of action' as...
Ø I did not do it.
Ø I did it but…… some affirmative excuse to exculpate
I also understand that, there is also additional way of defense against 'cause of action' as...
Ø there was 'no cause of action' and suit itself wasn't necessary at all!!
Whether it is a main suit or Interim Application in a suit, it does have some 'cause of action' cited by the applicant.
Now...!! During the discovery phase of defense, exculpatory evidence could not be gathered on time. And the Interim decree is passed.although defense pleaded two of the above three defenses i.e. 'there is no reason/cause of action' as well as 'I did not do it'.
Interim decree/order is in regards to stay/injunction/limited access etc, and this Interim Order is somewhat discretionary and reviewable in the same court.
Laterwards defense comes across evidence of category 'three' i.e. 'there was ABSOLUTELY no reason of filing suit or application/there was no cause of action'.
My Question:- How to tackle the opposite party's allegations that defense had witheld the evidence and missed the opportunity given, and hence although the evidence is relevant it can't be used against petitioner to call it a 'fraud by petitioner'?
