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

2012 Supreme(Raj) 1713

VINEET KOTHARI
Mukesh Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Smt. Madhuri – Respondent


For the Appellant:Mr. M.R. Singhvi, Sr. Advocateand Mr. Manish Parihar, Advocates.
For the Respondent:Mr. Sajjan Singh, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

1. - The present appeal has been filed by the appellant-husband under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 against the order dated 15.09.2005 passed by learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, No.1, Bikaner rejecting his divorce petition under Section 13 (1), (1-A) and (1-B) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, in Civil Original Case No.63A/2005 (Mukesh Sharma v. Smt. Madhuri) .

2. During the pendency of the present appeal, the parties have arrived at a compromise. A written compromise has been filed in the Court today and same has been duly verified by the Deputy Registrar (Judl.) of this Court. According to the said compromise, the appellant-husband has agreed to pay a sum of Rs. 6,25,000/- as the permanent alimony to the respondent-wife, out of which a Demand Draft No.268392 of Rs. 5,50,000/- drawn on Bank of Baroda, Sadulganj, Bikaner dated 11.05.2012 has been handed over to the respondent-wife and the remaining amount of Rs. 75,000/-, in cash, is undertaken to be paid by the appellant- Mukesh Kumar to respondent- Smt. Madhuri within a period of two days.

3. The respondent-wife in the compromise has agreed for grant of divorce decree in the present appeal on the b




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