Compromise agreements must be accurately recorded by the court to be enforceable, and referral to Lok Adalat is inappropriate when a valid joint memo exists; disputes must not bypass proper adjudication.

ORDER :

LALITHA KANNEGANTI, J.

Aggrieved by the order passed in Crl.Misc.No.209/2020 dated 30.10.2023 by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bengaluru whereby the Family Court had accepted the memo of calculation filed by the wife by observing that after adjusting payment of Rs.20,00,000/- made by the husband, there is remaining balance amount of Rs.7,32,000/- towards arrears of maintenance claimed in the petition. Hence, the husband is directed to pay the same. For balance payment or steps, the matter is posted to 21.11.2023.

2. The parties are referred to as husband and wife for the sake of convenience.

3. It is the case of the wife that she had filed Crl.Misc.No.313/2009 seeking maintenance of an amount of Rs.45,000/- per month and that came to be allowed by order dated 10.01.2013 whereby the husband was directed to pay an amount of Rs.15,000/- each to the wife and to the two children and also Rs.25,000/- towards the litigation expenses. Thereafter, against that order both the wife and husband had preferred RPFC No.31/2013 and RPFC.No.50/2013 and by order dated 17.12.2019, RPFC.No.31/2013 filed by the husband is dismissed with costs and RPFC No.50/2013 filed by the wife is partly allowed and the order of the Family Court is modified and the wife and two children are awarded maintenance at the rate of Rs.15,000/- per month each from the date of filing of the petition in C.Misc.No.313/2009 till the period stated in the impugned order.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner/husband submits that the parties have entered into compromise and they have signed a joint memo dated 18.02.2021. On 18.02.2021, it is observed by the Family Court that petitioner Nos.1 to 3 and respondent along with their counsel present before the court physically. Joint memo is filed. At the request of both parties and their counsel, the case is referred to Lok adalat to be held on 27.03.2021 to report final settlement. Call on 27.03.2021 before Lok adalat. Then the proceedings dated 27.03.2021 discloses that the respondent counsel filed memo. The petitioner and counsel absent i.e., the wife and the children and their counsel are absent. Matter not settled. Send back the file to the court. For objections to memo, if any, call on 26.05.2021. Thereafter, on 14.07.2021, the Court had observed that both advocates are present. At the request of both counsel, case is referred to Lok adalat to be held on 14.08.2021. Then the proceedings dated 14.08.2021 shows that case called out before Lok adalat. Petitioner and petitioner's counsel absent. Respondent and respondent's counsel present. Matter not settled. Send back the case file to the Court. Call on 07.09.2021. It is submitted by the learned counsel that as per the joint memo they have already given back the jewelry and paid an amount of Rs.20,00,000/-. Already the joint memo is acted upon. Now they have filed a memo before the Court saying that there are certain arrears of maintenance and by order impugned the Court had directed that the husband has to pay an amount of Rs.7,32,000/-. Learned counsel submits that when the compromise memo is acted upon by the parties, question of passing this order and the order on the joint memo are not sustainable. It is submitted that when the parties have agreed upon and entered into a joint memo and the same is placed before the Family Court, the Family Court ought not to have relegated the parties to the Lok adalat, instead of that the Family Court ought to have recorded the settlement. It is submitted that the procedure adopted by the Family Court in sending the parties to the Lok adalat is contrary to the settled law. He had relied on the judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Smt. Akkubai Vs. Shri. Venkatrao and others , [ILR 2014 KAR 2051] . He had relied on paragraph No.11 which reads thus:

“11. I really wonder, whether the learned Judge who has entertained this matter was aware of the elementary aspects of judicial functioning and the Lok Adalath. A