Matter as to dues of Divorced Wife against Husband fully and finally settled in compromise held between them: Court upheld such compromise
Civil Appeal No. 6905 of 2012
Bench: Justice Kurian Joseph; Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman
Case Brief: In the present appeal, which is arising out of the matrimonial disputes, the appellant faced the dissolution of her marriage with the respondent and when she approached with her appeal before the High Court, then that Court had also dismissed her claim and confirmed the order passed by the District Judge where her marriage was dissolved. Now, the appellant here was challenging the said order passed by the High Court. However, all of a sudden, while the appeal was pending before this bench, both the parties to the dispute personally present in the Court and they were also assisted by their respective counsels and they claimed to have agreed that by way of full and final settlement of all the claims due to the appellant, the settlement has been arrived at between them. However, they specifically claimed that the claim as to Stridhan is not settled, however, the said claim is the subject matter of the dispute pending as Civil Appeal before the High Court.
As such, this bench observed that all the other claims and dues can be settled. As such, this bench after considering all such relevant instances decided to disposed of the appeal as have been compromised between the parties and resultantly this bench decided to make the relevant orders in this connection. The bench as such orders the Respondent to pay settled amount by way of a Demand Draft drawn in the name of appellant in given time. Moreover, this bench also decided that the special leave petition which was in connection with the dispute pertaining to the claim of maintenance, is taken on board and now dismissed with this order. Also, a revision petition which pending before the High Court as was filed by the appellant is dismissed here. Also, the First Information Report filed with the Police station under section 498-A, 406, 323, 354, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 was quashed by this bench. Moreover, this bench also made it clear that the amount of settlement, if will not be paid by the respondent, then it will amount to contempt and also be held as liability to pay penal interest at the rate of 25 per cents.
Read the Judgment: Mamta Goyal Vs Ramgopal