SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(Del) 1459

SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
YASH MEHRA – Appellant
Versus
ARUNDHATI MEHRA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Aanchal Mullick, C.P.Saxena, GEETA LUTHRA


SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.

( 1 ) ADMIT.

( 2 ) AT request of learned counsel for the parties, the petition is taken up for final disposal. The parties filed a petition for divorce by mutual consent under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The statement of the parties were recorded on 21. 04. 2003 and orders were passed on the first motion. The parties thereafter filed a petition for second motion after the lapse of six months' period of time. This application was duly supported by affidavits of both the parties. The statement of the parties were recorded and thereafter the judgment was reserved and was fixed for pronouncement of orders.

( 3 ) THE two applications were filed by the respondent / wife under Order XXIII rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter to be referred to as, 'the Code') on 15. 09. 2003 and another one under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code on 22. 07. 2004 in the applications, it is stated by the respondent / wife that the petitioner / husband had agreed to make payment of Rs. 70 lakhs towards permanent alimony and to return Istridhan, but the petitioner had failed to keep a compromise. It is not in dispute that there are no such terms record








Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top