IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, J.
Shamsi Azmi - Appellant
Versus
Saher Khan - Respondent
Crl.M.C. 5539 of 2019 with Crl.M.A. 39257 of 2019
Decided On : 13-01-2020
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks to set aside prior directions. (Para 1) |
| 2. background on petitioner, respondent, and agreements. (Para 2 , 6) |
| 3. petitioner seeks quashing based on settlement. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 4. memorandum deemed order under section 125 cr.p.c. (Para 5) |
| 5. argument on maintainability before interim maintenance. (Para 8) |
| 6. court's interaction and understanding of parties' positions. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 7. agreement on maintenance amount for the respondent. (Para 11) |
| 8. court's binding clarification and conclusion. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
1. Vide the present, petitioner seeks directions thereby to set aside directions dated 30.09.2019, whereby the petitioner has been directed to file his income affidavit in a sealed envelope. The petitioner further prays for necessary directions to the learned trial Court that the maintainability of the case bearing MT No. 208/2018 titled as `Sheba Khan and Ors. Vs. Shamsi Azmi and Ors.' be decided first before proceeding further in the case.
2. The petitioner herein is the father and the respondent is his daughter from his first wife. The petitioner married Ms. Sheba Khan (first wife) on 01.03.1996. They were blessed with a girl child, respondent herein, on 19.02.1997. Due to extreme incompatibilities between the petitioner and his wife, the petitioner divorced her by pronouncing triple talaq on 19.11.1997. Thereafter, on 24.04.2003, the first wife filed petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for grant of maintenance for her as well on behalf of respondent (Saher Khan) before the Court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi. The said Court was pleased to direct the petitioner herein to pay Rs.8,000/- P.M. to Ms. Sheba Khan for the maintenance towards respondent herein. In the meanwhile, Ms. Sheba Khan, petitioner's first wife also got registered an FIR bearing no. 126/2003, under Section 498A/406 IPC, against the petitioner and his relatives, with Police Station - Tilak Marg. Afterwards, with the intervention of friends, relatives and well wishers of petitioner and Ms. Sheba Khan, a compromise was arrived between them and in furtherance of which Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was signed by them on 29.05.2005. The respondent, at that point of time, was a minor, aged 8 years and was being represented by her natural guardian, Ms. Sheba Khan. The MOU contains detailed terms and conditions with respect to alimony of Ms. Sheba Khan, maintenance to be paid to respondent and rights and liabilities of Ms. Sheba Khan towards the respondent. The terms and conditions relevant to the context of rights and liabilities of petitioner in regard to maintenance to be paid to respondent are as follows:
"That the party no.1 has agreed to pay a lump sum amount of Rs.12 lacs to party no.2. Six lacs for Sheba &the other six lacs for the minor daughter with liberty to Sheba to use this money as per her wishes without any hindrance whatsoever. However in case at the time of attaining majority Saher repudiates the present agreement, Sheba, would be liable to repay the amount of six lacs along with the benefits to Miss Sehar. The said amount is being paid to Saher in a lump sum in full and final settlement of her entire claims of maintenance (past, present, future) including schooling, higher studies, and marriage expenses etc and of any other kind against the party of the First Part and/or his relatives. In case Sheba Khan purchases any flat/property from the alimony of Rs.12 lacs or any part thereof the same would be purchased jointly in the name of Miss. Saher and Sheba Khan.
That the party no.1 also has agreed to pay a sum of Rs.8,000/- per month to Saher for the maintenance till she attains the age of 21 years or till she gets married whichever is earlier. Which as per the orders of the court is being deposited in the account of Sheba Khan for the same. Sheba Khan would also contribute her share of 1/3rd of maintenance i.e., Rs.4000/- per month for the welfare of Saher fo
AI
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.