CR-993-2019

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

CR-993-2019

Reserved on : September 01, 2022

Pronounced on : September 06, 2022

Dr. Priyanka Dahiya

....Petitioner

Versus

Dr. Manish Raj

….Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN

Present:

Mr. Aman Pal, Advocate

for the petitioner.

Ms. Sonia G. Singh, Advocate

for the respondent.

ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J.

Prayer in this petition is for setting aside the order dated

8.1.2019 passed by the District Judge, Additional Family Court, Karnal

vide which an application filed by the petitioner-wife under Order 7

Rule 11 C.P.C. to dismiss the petition filed by the respondent-husband

under Section 25 of the Guardianship and Wards Act, 1890 read with

Section 6 of the Hindu Minority and Guardian Act, 1956 for claiming the

custody of ‘A’ (name not disclosed) was declined.

SATISH KUMAR

2022.09.06 15:58

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

CR-993-2019

-2-

Brief facts of the case are that the marriage of the petitioner

with the respondent was solemnized on 31.10.2010 and out of this

wedlock, a male child ‘A’ was borne on 1.7.2015. Since the marriage

between the parties could not pull on, both of them decided to file a

petition under Section 28 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 for granting

a decree of divorce by mutual consent.

The said petition was filed

before the Family Court at Sonepat on 17.10.2017, i.e. just three

months after the birth of the male child. In para 5 of this petition, both

the parties made a joint declaration that they are living separately from

each other since September, 2015 and they are unable to live together

as husband and wife any more.

Para 7 of this petition reads as under :-

“7.

That the parties have now mutually settled

and agreed that the little male baby (namely ‘A’

shall remain in the custody of her mother

petitioner No.1, who shall be responsible to look

after him in all respect so that he may become a

very good citizen of his life. The parties have also

settled all their claims, assets and liabilities. The parties

have no other further claim whatsoever against each

other. The petitioner No.1 undertakes not to claim any

kind of istri dhan. The articles and gifts etc. have already

been taken back and received by the petitioner No.2

from petitioner No.1.”

SATISH KUMAR

2022.09.06 15:58

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

CR-993-2019

-3-

Thereafter, at the stage of first motion, on the same day,

i.e. 17.10.2017, a joint statement of the parties was recorded, in which

the following averments were made with regard to the custody of the

minor child :-

“It has been agreed between the parties that

custody of minor child, namely, ‘A’ shall remain

with petitioner No.1.

We further undertake not to file any

litigation in future pertaining to this marriage and

the matters connected therewith.

Our consent for divorce is free and voluntary. The

same has not been given under any force, pressure,

fraud, coercion, misrepresentation of undue influence.

There is no collusion between us in filling the present

petition for divorce by mutual consent.

We have signed the petition for divorce after

having been read over and understanding the contents

of the same. We undertake to abide by the terms and

conditions of settlement, in letter and spirit.”

Thereafter, on 6.11.2017, at the stage of second motion, the

following statement was recorded :-

“Our marriage was solemnized under Section 13 of the

Special Marriage Act, 1954 before the Marriage Officer,

Delhi on 31.10.2012. After the marriage, we lived

together as husband and wife and a male child ‘A’ was

born out from this wedlock. We are residing separately

SATISH KUMAR

2022.09.06 15:58

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

CR-993-2019

-4-

even after filing this petition. There has not been any