Bank Can Adjust OTS Deposit on Borrower Default, No Cheating u/s 420 IPC: Delhi High Court
02 Mar 2026
Divij Kumar Quits CMS INDUSLAW for Independent Practice
03 Mar 2026
Global Lawyers Debate AI Liability in Autonomous Vehicles
03 Mar 2026
CCPA Fines Startup ₹8 Lakh for False Child Growth Claims
05 Mar 2026
Madras High Court Scoffs at Police Custody Injury Claim
05 Mar 2026
India's Criminal Investigations Face Systemic Conviction Crisis
05 Mar 2026
Kerala HC Slams TDB Financial Discipline in Ayyappa Conclave, Orders Auditor Report on Past Anomalies: High Court of Kerala
06 Mar 2026
ST Members Can Invoke Section 13B HMA If Hinduised By Customs: Chhattisgarh High Court
06 Mar 2026
Lease Cancellation Valid Even by 'In-Charge' Mining Officer Under OMMC Rules: Orissa High Court
06 Mar 2026
J. K. MAHESHWARI, RAJESH BINDAL
Shikha Banyal – Appellant
Versus
Akashmani Singh – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
ORDER :
1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
2. Perused the Settlement Agreement dated 10th May, 2024. Both, the petitioner and the respondent attended the hearing through virtual mode. The Settlement Agreement dated 10th May, 2024 has been signed by both of them, the learned counsel representing both the parties and the learned Mediator.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner-wife has submitted that the total settlement amount is Rs. 2,70,000/-. Out of this Rs. 1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Fifty Thousand only) have already been received by the petitioner-wife on 10.05.2024 in the Mediation Centre and the balance amount of Rs. 1,20,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Twenty Thousand) have been received by the petitioner-wife today in her HDFC Bank through IMPS RRN No. 419111651762 transferred by the respondent-husband from his account in State Bank of India, towards full and final settlement.
4. We deem it appropriate to extract relevant clauses 1 to 21 of the Settlement Agreement dated 10th May, 2024, which read as under:
The court affirmed that mutual consent and voluntary agreements between parties can lead to the dissolution of marriage and resolution of disputes under Article 142 of the Constitution.
The court upheld the dissolution of marriage by mutual consent under Article 142, confirming that the parties reached an amicable settlement through mediation and met the conditions of Section 13(B) ....
The court exercised its power under Article 142 to dissolve the marriage by mutual consent and quash all related legal proceedings.
Courts should encourage amicable settlements in matrimonial disputes and may quash related proceedings if the parties have voluntarily settled the matter.
The main legal principle established is the encouragement of amicable settlements in matrimonial disputes, as well as the voluntary nature of settlements and the absence of fear, force, or coercion.
In matrimonial matters, genuine settlement and mutual divorce can be valid grounds for quashing FIR and proceedings.
The court emphasized the significance of voluntary settlements in matrimonial disputes and applied the provisions of section 13(B) of the Hindu Marriage Act to reach its decision.
Matrimonial disputes should be put to quietus if the parties have arrived upon a genuine settlement, and provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, allow for divorce by mutual consent.
Voluntary settlement in matrimonial disputes and the grant of divorce by mutual consent under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
The court can exercise inherent powers under section 482 of the Code to quash non-compoundable offences, especially in cases of amicable settlement in matrimonial differences.
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.