Lok Adalat awards deemed executable decrees; maintainability upheld where breaching party challenges post-violation and divorce – merits for executing court.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. Gyanand Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner duly assisted by Ms. Akanksha Malviya and Mr. Brajendra Nath Pandey, learned counsel representing the sole respondent.

2. The present petition has been preferred for the grant of following relief(s):

“(i) for quashing the order dated 15.12.2009 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Khagaria in Execution Case No. 01 of 2003 (Meenakshi Gupta @ Rinku vs.Deepak Kumar) by which it has been held that the execution case filed by the respondent under Order XXI, Rule 11 read with section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code to execute the award dated 31.05.2003 made by the Special Lok Adalat, Khagaria is maintainable in the eye of law and as such the parties may further proceed in the matter in accordance with procedural law.

(ii) for holding that the award dated 31.05.2003 made by the Special Lok Adalat, Khagaria is not executable in the facts and circumstances of the case and as such the execution case filed by the respondent for execution of the said award is not maintainable.

(iii) for grant of any such other relief or reliefs for which the petitioner is legally found entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

3. The petitioner, Deepak Kumar and the respondent, Meenakshi Gupta @ Rinku tied nuptial knots on 10.12.1993. The petitioner at that time was serving as the Scientist in the Department of Information and Technology, Government of India, Chennai. Though they continued their marital journey together for more than five years, it is his case that once the petitioner’s mother reached Chennai, the problem arose and thereafter, the lady left for her parents’ home at Khagaria, (Bihar). This followed Complaint Case No. 568(C) of 1999 under section 498 (A) of the Indian Penal Code and ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act

4. Two other cases which came into existence thereafter are/were the Divorce Suit No. 8 of 2002 and the Maintenance Case No. 12 of 2000. Later, good sense prevailed upon the parties and their joint petition/agreement was stamped by the Lok Adalat, Khagaria which followed the award dated 31.05.2003.

5. As per the award, the parties agreed to close/withdraw all the three aforesaid cases in the following terms and conditions:

“(i) they will be taking care of the sentiments of each other as husband and wife and shall not do anything which is not moral;

(ii) the petitioner shall be paying one- third of his salary to the lady in her Bank Account;

(iii) the ornaments of the lady shall be returned by the petitioner;

(iv) in case, any of the party violates the terms and conditions, one of them shall be entitled to move before a competent Civil Court for getting it executed.”

(Annexure-3 to the petition).

6. Close on the signing of the aforesaid agreement, which followed the award, the lady feeling cheated by the husband preferred Execution Case No. 1 of 2003 (Meenakshi Gupta @ Rinku vs. Deepak Kumar) before the Family Court, Khagaria alleging that the petitioner who is drawing salary of Rs.20,000/- and was thus liable to pay one-third of the salary following the agreement has sent only the Bank Draft of only Rs.716/- for the month of June, 2003. It is to be noted that the