PRAVEEN SINGH RAMAKANT BHADAURIYAversusNEELAM PRAVEEN SINGH BHADAURIYA
- Citation
- 2019 INSC 615
- Decided
- 1 May 2019
- Disposal
- Disposed off
- Bench
- R BANUMATHI
Holding
The Supreme Court may, exercising its power under Article 142, dissolve a marriage by mutual consent when the parties have reached an amicable settlement, even if earlier courts had dismissed the divorce suit.
Summary
The appellant and respondent were married in 1998 and later lived separately, leading the husband to file a suit for dissolution of marriage which was dismissed by the trial, district and high courts. While the appeal was pending before the Supreme Court, the parties reached an amicable settlement through mediation, agreeing to a financial settlement and withdrawal of all pending cases. They filed a separate application seeking dissolution of marriage by mutual consent, invoking the Supreme Court's power under Article 142 of the Constitution. The Court, considering the settlement and the parties' consent, exercised its Article 142 jurisdiction to dissolve the marriage and incorporated the settlement terms into the judgment. The appeal was consequently disposed of, with the decree of divorce by mutual consent and the agreed financial arrangements becoming enforceable.
Issues considered
- Whether the Supreme Court can invoke its power under Article 142 of the Constitution to dissolve a marriage by mutual consent when the parties have amicably settled, despite earlier procedural dismissals.
- Whether the terms of a settlement between the parties can be incorporated as part of the Court's judgment under Article 142.
- Whether pending criminal and civil cases between the parties can be withdrawn or quashed in accordance with the settlement.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973s. 125
- Constitution of Indias. 142
- Indian Penal Code, 1860s. 396, s. 406, s. 498A
- Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005
Subjects
Judgment
150 [2019]
SUPREME COURT 7 S.C.R. 150
REPORTS [2019] 7 S.C.R.
A PRAVEEN SINGH RAMAKANT BHADAURIYA
v.
NEELAM PRAVEEN SINGH BHADAURIYA
(Civil Appeal No. 4541 of 2019)
B MAY 1, 2019
[R. BANUMATHI AND S. ABDUL NAZEER, JJ.]
Constitution of India: Art. 142 – Invocation of power under
– In the instant case, divorce petition was pending between the parties
and they were living separately – Parties resolved to amicably settle
C
the matter and filed separate application agreeing for dissolution
of marriage by mutual consent – In the facts and circumstances of
the case, by invoking power under Art. 142, the marriage of the
appellant and respondent is dissolved – Appeal disposed of – Family
law – Divorce – Compromise/Settlement.
D
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 4541
of 2019.
From the Judgment and Order dated 29.05.2013 of the High Court
of Allahabad in Second Appeal No. 641 of 2013.
E Ashok Mathur, Adv. for the Appellant.
Mr. Rajesh Aggarwal, Ms. Mridul Aggarwal, Advs. for the
Respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
F R. BANUMATHI, J. 1. Leave granted.
2. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 29.05.2013
passed by the High Court of Allahabad in Second Appeal No. 641 of
2013, in which the High Court has dismissed the appeal preferred by the
appellant and thereby declining to dissolve the marriage.
G 3. The appellant and the respondent were married on 07.05.1998.
A girl child was born out of the said wedlock and she is now aged about
18 years. Due to strained relationship, the parties are living separately.
The appellant-husband has filed a suit for dissolution of marriage before
the Family Court, Mumbai, which was subsequently transferred to Etawah
District Court, Uttar Pradesh. The Trial Court dismissed the divorce
H
150
PRAVEEN SINGH RAMAKANT BHADAURIYA v. NEELAM 151
PRAVEEN SINGH BHADAURIYA [R. BANUMATHI, J.]
petition filed by the appellant by judgment dated 09.11.2009. The appeal A
preferred by the appellant was also dismissed by the District Court by
the judgment dated 29.11.2012. The High Court also dismissed the second
appeal preferred by the appellant-husband. Being aggrieved, the appellant
is before us.
4. We have heard Mr. Ashok Mathur, learned counsel appearing B
on behalf of the appellant as well as Mr. Rajesh Aggarwal, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the respondent.
5. When the matter was pending before this Court, the parties
were referred to mediation and the parties have amicably settled the
matter. The parties have also filed a separate application agreeing for C
dissolution of marriage by mutual consent invoking the powers under
Article 142 of Constitution of India. As per the settlement between the
parties, the appellant-husband has agreed to pay Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees
ten lakhs) to the respondent-wife (paid today by way of post-dated cheque
No. 000278 drawn in favour of respondent-wife viz. Neelam Singh
dated 11th May, 2019 drawn on Bank of Baroda) in full and final settlement D
of her claims towards monthly maintenance past, present and future and
in full quit of all other claims. Additionally, the appellant has agreed to
pay Rs.3,00,000/- by way of FDR in the name of the daughter payable
within a period of three months from today. He has also agreed to
contribute another one lakh at the time of solemnization of the marriage E
of the daughter. The parties have also agreed that all the pending cases
between the parties shall be withdrawn or they will agree for quashing
the respective cases.
6. Since the parties have amicably settled the matter, considering
the facts and circumstances of the case, in exercise of our power under F
Article 142 of the Constitution of India, the marriage of the appellant
and the respondent solemnized on 07.05.1998 is dissolved. The following
terms of Compromise between the parties shall form part of this judgment
which reads as under:
“4. Both the parties hereto, had earlier arrived at an amicable G
mutual settlement on the following terms and conditions for divorce
by mutual consent, before the mediation centre.
5. It was agreed between the parties that they will pray for
withdrawing/quashing before the Hon’ble Court/s to dispose of/
quash the following pending cases, as mutually settled:
H
152 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2019] 7 S.C.R.
A i. In the Court of CJM, Etawah, UP Case No. 1537/2009
Neelam vs. Pravin (under Section 125 CrPC) including its
appeal before Allahabad High Court.
ii. In the Court of ACJM, Etawah, Case No. 186 of 2009 Neelam
Vs. Pravin (under Domestic Violence Act)
B iii. Before Special Anti Dakait Magistrate Case No. 323 of
2006 Praveen Vs. Ramender.
iv. Case under Section 396 IPC pending before Hon’ble High
Court of Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh.
C v. Before CJM Etawah Case No. 65 of 2002 Neelam vs. Pravin
& others under Section 498A IPC.
vi. Before ACJM , Etawah, Case No. 506 of 2002 Neelam
Vs.Pravin & Others under Section 406 IPC
vii. Any other case amongst the parties before any other courts,
D if any.
6. The parties shall pray before the Hon’ble Court for the passing
of the decree of divorce by mutual consent invoking the powers
under Article 142 of the Constitution of India.
7. The petitioner-husband had agreed to pay Rs.10,00,000/-
E
(Rupees Ten Lacs only) to the respondent-wife viz. full and final
settlement of all her claims towards monthly maintenance past
present and future, stridhan, belongings and any other claim
whatsoever.
8. The applicant wife desired a further sum for the marriage and
F educational expenses for her daughter to be deposited in the
shape of FDR in the name of daughter “Janhavi Singh”. When
the said aspect was brought to the knowledge of this Hon’ble
Court in last 2 hearings, it was orally agreed upon by the opposite
side; and the matter was adjourned for filing the necessary
G documents.
8A. One FDR of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees three lakhs) shall be paid
to daughter within three months and Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees one
lakh) shall be paid at the time of marriage of the daughter”.
H
PRAVEEN SINGH RAMAKANT BHADAURIYA v. NEELAM 153
PRAVEEN SINGH BHADAURIYA [R. BANUMATHI, J.]
7. So ar as other cases are concerned, as and when the application A
is made before the concerned Court, the concerned Court shall pass the
appropriate orders in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties.
8. In case of non-compliance of the terms of compromise, the
parties would be liable for contempt of this Court in addition to other
remedies available under law. B
9. The Registry shall draft the decree accordingly.
10. The appeal is disposed of in above terms.
Devika Gujral Appeal disposed of.
C
D
E
F
G
H
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.