PRAVEEN SINGH RAMAKANT BHADAURIYA versus NEELAM PRAVEEN SINGH BHADAURIYA on 1 May 2019

[2019] 7 S.C.R.

APRAVEEN SINGH RAMAKANT BHADAURIYA

v.

NEELAM PRAVEEN SINGH BHADAURIYA

(Civil Appeal No. 4541 of 2019)

B

MAY 1, 2019

[R. BANUMATHI AND S. ABDUL NAZEER, JJ.]

Constitution of India: Art. 142 – Invocation of power under– In the instant case, divorce petition was pending between the partiesand they were living separately – Parties resolved to amicably settlethe matter and filed separate application agreeing for dissolutionof marriage by mutual consent – In the facts and circumstances ofthe case, by invoking power under Art. 142, the marriage of theappellant and respondent is dissolved – Appeal disposed of – Familylaw – Divorce – Compromise/Settlement.

C

D

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 4541of 2019.

From the Judgment and Order dated 29.05.2013 of the High Courtof Allahabad in Second Appeal No. 641 of 2013.

EAshok Mathur, Adv. for the Appellant.

Mr. Rajesh Aggarwal, Ms. Mridul Aggarwal, Advs. for theRespondent.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by FR. BANUMATHI, J. 1. Leave granted.

2. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 29.05.2013passed by the High Court of Allahabad in Second Appeal No. 641 of2013, in which the High Court has dismissed the appeal preferred by theappellant and thereby declining to dissolve the marriage.

3. The appellant and the respondent were married on 07.05.1998.A girl child was born out of the said wedlock and she is now aged about18 years. Due to strained relationship, the parties are living separately.The appellant-husband has filed a suit for dissolution of marriage beforethe Family Court, Mumbai, which was subsequently transferred to EtawahDistrict Court, Uttar Pradesh. The Trial Court dismissed the divorce G

H

petition filed by the appellant by judgment dated 09.11.2009. The appealpreferred by the appellant was also dismissed by the District Court bythe judgment dated 29.11.2012. The High Court also dismissed the secondappeal preferred by the appellant-husband. Being aggrieved, the appellantis before us.

4. We have heard Mr. Ashok Mathur, learned counsel appearingon behalf of the appellant as well as Mr. Rajesh Aggarwal, learned counselappearing on behalf of the respondent.

5. When the matter was pending before this Court, the partieswere referred to mediation and the parties have amicably settled thematter. The parties have also filed a separate application agreeing fordissolution of marriage by mutual consent invoking the powers underArticle 142 of Constitution of India. As per the settlement between theparties, the appellant-husband has agreed to pay Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupeesten lakhs) to the respondent-wife (paid today by way of post-dated chequeNo. 000278 drawn in favour of respondent-wife viz. Neelam Singhdated 11[th] May, 2019 drawn on Bank of Baroda) in full and final settlementof her claims towards monthly maintenance past, present and future andin full quit of all other claims. Additionally, the appellant has agreed topay Rs.3,00,000/- by way of FDR in the name of the daughter payablewithin a period of three months from today. He has also agreed tocontribute another one lakh at the time of solemnization of the marriageof the daughter. The parties have also agreed that all the pending casesbetween the parties shall be withdrawn or they will agree for quashingthe respective cases.

6. Since the parties have amicably settled the matter, consideringthe facts and circumstances of the case, in exercise of our power underArticle 142 of the Constitution of India, the marriage of the appellantand the respondent solemnized on 07.05.1998 is dissolved. The followingterms of Compromise between the parties shall form part of this judgmentwhich reads as under:

“4. Both the parties hereto, had earlier arrived at an amicablemutual settlement on the following terms and conditions for divorceby mutual consent, before the mediation centre.

5. It was agreed between the parties that they will pray forwithdrawing/quashing before the Hon’ble Court/s to dispose of/quash the following pending cases, as mutually settled:

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

i. In the Court of CJM, Etawah, UP Case No. 1537/2009Neelam vs. Pravin (under Section 125 CrPC) including itsappeal before Allahabad High Court.

ii. In the Court of ACJM, Etawah, Case No. 186 of 2009 NeelamVs. Pravin (under Domestic Violence Act)

iii. Before Special Anti Dakait Magistrate Case No. 323 of2006 Praveen Vs. Ramender.

iv. Case under Section 396 IPC pending before Hon’ble HighCourt of Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh.

v. Before CJM Etawah Case No. 65 of 2002 Neelam vs. Pravin& others under Section 498A IPC.

vi. Before ACJM , Etawah, Case No. 506 of 2002 NeelamVs.Pravin & Others under Section 406 IPC

vii. Any other case amongst the parties before any other courts,if any.

6. The parties shall pray before the Hon’ble Court for the passingof the decree of divorce by mutual consent invoking the powersunder Article 142 of the Constitution of India.

7. The petitioner-husband had agreed to pay Rs.10,00,000/-(Rupees Ten Lacs only) to the respondent-wife viz. full and finalsettlement of all her claims towards monthly maintenance pastpresent and future, stridhan, belongings and any other claimwhatsoever.

8. The applicant wife desired a further sum for the marriage andeducational expenses for her daughter to be deposited in theshape of FDR in the name of daughter “Janhavi Singh”. Whenthe said aspect was brought to the knowledge of this Hon’bleCourt in last 2 hearings, it was orally agreed upon by the oppositeside; and the matter was adjourned for filing the necessarydocuments.

8A. One FDR of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees three lakhs) shall be paidto daughter within three months and Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees onelakh) shall be paid at the time of marriage of the daughter”.

PRAVEEN SINGH RAMAKANT BHADAURIYA v. NEELAMPRAVEEN SINGH BHADAURIYA [R. BANUMATHI, J.]

7. So ar as other cases are concerned, as and when the applicationis made before the concerned Court, the concerned Court shall pass theappropriate orders in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties.

8. In case of non-compliance of the terms of compromise, theparties would be liable for contempt of this Court in addition to otherremedies available under law.

9. The Registry shall draft the decree accordingly.

10. The appeal is disposed of in above terms.

Devika Gujral

Appeal disposed of.

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H