Back
2019 Supreme(P&H) 2686
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Rajan Gupta, Manjari Nehru Kaul, JJ.
Ritika Goel - Appellant
Versus
Ajay Goel - Respondent
FAO-M-82-2018
Decided On : 06-12-2019
Mr. Neeraj Gupta, Advocate, for the appellant.; Mr. G.C.Shahpuri, Advocate, for the respondent.
A decree of divorce by mutual consent must remain intact unless fraud, undue influence, or coercion can be proved.
Headnote:
Fraud - Dissolution of Marriage - Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Section 13-B
Fact of the Case:
The parties mutually agreed to dissolve their marriage under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, with terms including permanent alimony and maintenance for their daughter. The wife later alleged fraud and coercion, seeking to set aside the decree of divorce.
Finding of the Court:
The court found no evidence of coercion or undue influence in the wife's consent to the terms of divorce. It held that the decree of divorce by mutual consent must remain intact unless fraud, undue influence, or coercion can be proved.
Issues: The issues revolved around the validity of the consent decree of divorce, allegations of fraud and coercion, and the applicability of Section 19(2) of the Family Courts Act, 1984.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that a decree of divorce by mutual consent is not subject to compliance with certain terms and conditions between the parties, unless fraud, undue influence, or coercion can be proved. It also held that Section 19(2) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 bars the entertaining of any appeal against a consent decree of divorce.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the impugned judgment and decree passed by the Additional District Judge, Kurukshetra.
JUDGMENT
Manjari Nehru Kaul, J. - The instant appeal has been preferred by the wife-Ritika Goel against the judgment and decree dated 05.01.2018 of learned Additional District Judge, Kurukshetra, whereby the petition jointly filed by her and the respondent/husband-Ajay Goel under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was allowed.
2. Few facts necessary for adjudication of the present appeal as pleaded in the petition filed before the Court below may be noticed.
3. The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 10.02.2012 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. One daughter was born out of the said wedlock who is living with the wife. Differences arose between the couple soon after their marriage as a result of which their marriage ran into rough weather. After a wearisome period of endless disputes and wrangling, they mutually agreed to dissolve their marriage by filing a petition under Section 13-B of the Act before the learned Additional District Judge, Kurukshetra. On 03.07.2017, a joint statement of the parties was recorded to the said effect. Thereafter, they recorded their respective first motion statements before the Court below. The second motion statements of both the parties were recorded on 05.01.2018 i.e. after the statutory period of six months from the recording of their first motion statements. In the second motion statements it was reiterated by the parties that due to the differences that had developed between them, after their marriage, it was not possible for them to live together and due to their temperamental differences etc. they had withdrawn from the society of each other. It was also stated by both the parties that all their disputes regarding maintenance, istri dhan, permanent alimony etc. stood settled and they would be bound by the following terms of their divorce:-
"The husband was to pay Rs.12 lakhs to the wife towards permanent alimony which included past, present and future maintenance and out of the said amount Rs.01 lakh was to be received by the wife in cash, Rs. 02 lakhs vide cheque No. 241404 dated 02.07.2017 in favour of the wife, Rs.03 lakhs vide cheque No. 241405 dated 03.07.2017 in favour of their minor daughter and another amount of Rs.03 lakhs was to be deposited in the name of their daughter till her attaining majority. The remaining amount of Rs.06 lakhs was received by the wife vide cheque No.241407 dated 05.01.2018 and cheque No.241408 dated 05.01.2018 in favour of the minor daughter till her attaining majority."
4. It was agreed between the parties that the wife shall not claim any maintenance allowance or anything from the husband in future under any law.
5. The minor child was to remain in the custody of the wife and the husband was not to claim her custody in future. In case the child wanted to go abroad before she attained majority, the husband was not to have any objection to the same. The wife could file any application on behalf of the child to any authority or department, for the benefit of the child without the permission or consent of the husband.
6. While recording their second motion statements it was categorically stated by both the parties that they were making their respective statements without any fear, coercion or pressure. It was also stated that they would not file any cases against each other in future and would withdraw all complaints, if any, pending before any forum or court. After the Court satisfied itself that their statements were free from coercion or fear, the marriage of the parties was dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent under Section 13-B of the Act.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant-wife has vehemently argued that the wife was not in the right frame of mind as she was being maltreated by her husband and thus was under extreme mental pressure when she gave her consent for dissolution of the marriage with the respondent under Section 13-B of the Act. It was further urged that when the first mot
