Back
ARAVIND KUMAR, M. M. SUNDRESH
Aakritee Singh @ Shalu – Appellant
Versus
Rajesh Singh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. settlement agreement details and case closures. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. mutual divorce decree and settlement enforcement. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. disposal of pending applications. (Para 5 , 6) |
ORDER :
2. In tune with the said Settlement Agreement, a Demand Draft amounting to Rs.13,50,000/- has been handed over by the learned counsel for the respondent-husband to the counsel for the petitioner-wife, a copy of which is placed on the file. Consequently, the following cases are closed/withdrawn/quashed:
3. Accordingly, by invoking our power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, there shall be a mutual divorce between the parties, as agreed upon. A decree of divorce be drawn up accordingly.
5. Accordingly, I.A. No.300594/2024 is allowed and the Transfer Petition stands disposed of on the aforesaid terms.
The court upheld the mutual consent divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, recognizing the validity of the settlement agreement between the parties.
The court granted a decree of divorce by mutual consent under Article 142 of the Constitution, recognizing the validity of the parties' Settlement Agreement.
The court exercised its power under Article 142 to dissolve the marriage by mutual consent and quash all related legal proceedings.
The court recognized the validity of a mutual divorce settlement under Article 142, ensuring no further claims arise between the parties post-agreement.
Divorce by mutual consent requires both parties to agree on terms, including financial settlements, and can lead to quashing of all related pending cases.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
