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

2023 Supreme(Del) 3255

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Neena Bansal Krishna, JJ.
Shri Rohit Chhabra – Appellant
Versus
Nishala Chhabra – Respondent
MAT.APP.(F.C.) 129 of 2022 & CM APPL. 38351 of 2022
Decided On : 12-07-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mr. S.C. Singhal and Mr. Girdhari Singh, Advocates, for the Appellant and Appellant in person.
Mr. Mandeep Kumar Sharma, Advocate, for the Respondent through V.C. and Respondent in person.

The court upheld the validity and enforceability of the settlement agreement reached by the parties, emphasizing the importance of voluntary resolution of disputes.

Headnote:

Maintenance - Settlement Agreement - The court facilitated a settlement agreement between the parties, wherein the appellant agreed to pay a specified sum for full and final settlement of all disputes, including alimony, and the parties agreed to take divorce by mutual consent. The respondent agreed to withdraw her case under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, and the parties undertook various obligations as per the settlement terms.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant sought to set aside an order granting maintenance and dismiss the respondent's application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. However, the parties voluntarily settled their disputes in court.

Finding of the Court:

The court facilitated a settlement agreement between the parties, disposing of the appeal and pending applications in view of the settlement.

Issues: The main issue was the appellant's appeal against the maintenance order and the respondent's application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the voluntary settlement agreement reached by the parties, which led to the disposal of the appeal and pending applications.

Final Decision: In view of the settlement between the parties, the appeal was disposed of along with pending applications.

JUDGMENT (Oral)

1. The appellant in his present appeal has made following prayer:

    "That the present appeal be allowed and the impugned Order dated 02.07.2022 passed by the Court of Shri Vipin Kumar Rai, Judge Family Court, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi thereby granting maintenance of Rs. 20,000/- per month in addition to Rs. 10,000/- per month granted by Mahila Court as rent compensation be set aside and the application of the respondent under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act be dismissed."

2. The appellant alongwith his father, Mr. Praveen Chhabra and learned counsels, Mr. S.C. Singhal and Mr. Girdhari Singh are present in court.

3. The respondent is present in person alongwith her counsel, Mr. Mandeep Kumar Sharma, who has joined through V.C.

4. After interaction and counselling done in the open Court, the parties have voluntarily and without any coercion have agreed to mutually settle their disputes in following terms.

a) The appellant shall pay a sum of Rs. 50,00,000/- towards full and final settlement of all the disputes between the parties including the claim of the respondent for past, present and future alimony.

b) It is agreed that the parties shall take divorce by mutual consent and the First Motion Petition shall be filed by them within 15 days from today. Rs. 20,00,000/- shall be paid by the appellant to the respondent at the time of recording of statement in the First Motion.

c) That the respondent shall withdraw her case under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 within one week thereafter. The appellant shall pay a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- at the time of withdrawal of said petition.

d) The parties shall file Second Motion for divorce within 15 days of the First Motion alongwith appropriate applications for seeking waiver. The appellant shall pay Rs. 10,00,000/- to the respondent at the time of recording of statement in the Second Motion.

e) The parties shall file a petition for quashing of F.I.R No. 427/2016 registered with Police Station Malviya Nagar, Delhi under Sections 406, 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the appellant and his family members within one week of the orders in the Second Motion granting divorce by mutual consent. The appellant shall pay the remaining balance amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- to the respondents, at the time of quashing of F.I.R.

f) The parties undertake that they shall be bound by the settlement and both the parties shall cooperate for moving the applications and for making their respective statements.

5. The parties undertake to be bound by the terms of the settlement and in case of any violation, they shall be liable for action under Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

6. Furthermore, it is hereby clarified that if the settlement does not get materialized, then the respondent shall be liable to return the money that she may have received till then from the appellant. Moreover, the parties shall be at liberty to revive their respective litigations in case the settlement does not finalise.

7. In view of the settlement between the parties, the appeal is disposed of along with pending applications, if any.

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 Back to top