Allowed

Smt. Vineeta Rathaur v. Dharmendra K. Rathaur

Allahabad HC10 Jan 2020FAPL/324/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the appeal on the basis of a joint compromise affidavit filed by the parties. The court set aside the divorce decree passed by the Family Court and quashed three criminal cases registered against the respondent, noting the parties are living together peacefully.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is allowed; the impugned judgment and decree of divorce are set-aside; three criminal cases registered at the behest of the appellant are quashed.

Smt. Vineeta Rathaur Vs Dharmendra K. Rathaur — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

¶2

Court No. - 4

¶3

Case :- FIRST APPEAL No. - 324 of 2003 Appellant :- Smt. Vineeta Rathaur Respondent :- Dharmendra K. Rathaur Counsel for Appellant :- Ashok Mehta,P.N.Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- Maneesh Singh,R.P.Singh Civil Misc. Delay Condonation Application No. 378653 of 2015

¶4

Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

¶5

This is an application seeking condonation of delay in filing the restoration application.

¶6

The delay condonation application is supported by an affidavit of applicant/appellant Smt. Vineeta Rathaur.

¶7

Cause shown in the affidavit accompanying the delay condonation application for non-appearance is sufficient.

¶8

The delay condonation application is allowed and the delay in filing the restoration application is condoned.

¶9

Order Date :- 10.1.2020 SFH

¶10

Court No. - 4

¶11

Case :- FIRST APPEAL No. - 324 of 2003

¶12

Appellant :- Smt. Vineeta Rathaur Respondent :- Dharmendra K. Rathaur Counsel for Appellant :- Ashok Mehta,P.N.Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- Maneesh Singh,R.P.Singh Civil Misc. Restoration Application No. 378654 of 2015

¶13

¶14

Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

¶15

This is an application for recalling the order dated 24.09.2015 passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court and for restoration of the appeal.

¶16

The recall/restoration application is supported by an affidavit of applicant/appellant Smt. Vineeta Rathaur.

¶17

Cause shown in the affidavit accompanying the restoration application for non-appearance is sufficient.

¶18

The restoration application is allowed.

¶19

The order dated 24.09.2015 is recalled and the appeal is restored to its original number.

¶20

Order Date :- 10.1.2020 SFH

¶21

. .

¶22

Court No. - 4

¶23

Case :- FIRST APPEAL No. - 324 of 2003

¶24

Appellant :- Smt. Vineeta Rathaur Respondent :- Dharmendra K. Rathaur Counsel for Appellant :- Ashok Mehta,P.N.Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- Maneesh Singh,R.P.Singh Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

¶25

Restored.

¶26

For order, see our order passed on Civil Misc. Restoration Application No. 378654 of 2015.

¶27

Order Date :- 10.1.2020 SFH

. .

Court No. - 4

Case :- FIRST APPEAL No. - 324 of 2003

¶32

Appellant :- Smt. Vineeta Rathaur Respondent :- Dharmendra K. Rathaur Counsel for Appellant :- Ashok Mehta,P.N.Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- Maneesh Singh,R.P.Singh

¶33

Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

¶34

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶35

This appeal is directed against the judgement and decree dated 11.02.2003 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Kanpur Nagar, by which the Matrimonial Suit No. 653/99 (Dharmendra K. Rathaur Vs. Smt. Vineeta Rathaur) filed by the plaintiff/respondent Dharmendra K. Rathaur u/s 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") has been decreed and the marriage between the appellant and the respondent has been dissolved by a decree of divorce.

¶36

When this matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the parties made a joint statement that the parties have entered into the compromise outside the Court. The terms and conditions subject to which the compromise has been arrived at, have been set forth in the joint affidavit of the parties which was filed by them in the Court today and the parties are living peacefully together along with the daughter Harshita Rathore and sons Aditya Rathore and Kushal Rathore, aged about 22 years, 20 years and 11 years respectively and they have no objection if the three criminal cases registered at the behest of the defendant/appellant against the plaintiff/respondent which are offshoots of this matrimonial dispute between them are quashed and also to the present appeal being allowed and the impugned judgement and decree set-aside.

¶37

The paragraph nos. 3 to 12 of the joint affidavit containing the terms and conditions are being reproduced hereinbelow :-

¶38

3. That in between the matrimonial dispute which arose between

¶39

¶40

the parties came to an amicable settlement and the appellant is residing with the respondent without any coercion whatsoever out of her own sweet will and there is no dispute of any nature between the appellant and the respondent.

¶41

4. That since 2006, the appellant and the respondent are residing with each other without their being any sort of dispute between them and out of their wedlock, there are three issues namely Harshita Rathore (aged about 22 years), Aditya Rathore (aged about 20 years) and Kushal Rathore (aged about 11 years).

¶42

5. That the entire family are peacefully residing at 127/23, W-1, Saket Nagar, Post Office-Juhi, P.S.- Kidwai Nagar, Kanpur Nagar.

¶43

6. That there were three F.I.Rs. registered by the appellant against the family members of the respondent and the details of the same are reproduced hereinbelow for the proper appraisal of the case :-

¶44

a) Case Crime No. 54 of 2006, P.S.- Kotwali, u/s 147, 323, 504 & 506 I.P.C., District- Kanpur Nagar.

¶45

b) Case Crime No. 329 of 2006, P.S.- Chakeri, u/s 323, 504 & 506 I.P.C., District- Kanpur Nagar.

¶46

c) Case Crime No. 131 of 2006, P.S.- Kidwai Nagar, u/s 323, 342 & 504 I.P.C., District- Kanpur Nagar.

¶47

7.That there was a First Information Report registered by the respondent against the family members of the appellant as Case Crime No. 61 of 2006, u/s 147, 352, 504 & 506 I.P.C., P.S.Kotwali, District- Kanpur Nagar.

¶48

8. That there was one more case filed by the appellant against the respondent and his family members u/s 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. read with Section 3 / 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act which has been amicably resolved on the basis of the compromise entered into between the parties. The photocopy of the order passed by the learned trial court in the aforesaid case is being enclosed and marked as (Annexure No. A-1) to this affidavit.

¶49

9. That in terms of the settlement arrived between the appellant and respondent, unconditionally it has been agreed that there will be no claim on the immovable property bearing house no. 127/23, W-1, Saket Nagar, Post Office- Juhi, P.S.- Kidwai Nagar, Kanpur Nagar by the appellant as the same will be transferred in the name of the respondent by the mother of the respondent thereafter on the basis of the said settlement arrived at between the appellant and the respondent.

¶50

10. That now as the parties without any coercion or undue influence are residing since 2006 onward the present proceedings may be set aside on the terms and conditions as it deems fit by this Hon'ble Court and in connection thereof, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash all the other related criminal and civil proceedings based on the joint affidavit filed in the present case. And/or pass any other order which deems fit in the eyes of justice.

¶51

11. That in these circumstances as stated above, it is absolute necessary in the interest of justice this Hon'ble High Court may graciously be pleased to take the present supplementary affidavit

¶52

¶53

on record and/or may pass such other suitable order which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and consider proper under the circumstances of the case, otherwise the applicant/appellant shall irreparable loss and injury.

¶54

12. That hence, in the interest of justice the present supplementary affidavit may be taken on record and after considering the same appropriate orders may be passed in the present case.

¶55

Since the matrimonial dispute between the parties has been amicably settled, we allow this appeal in terms of compromise which shall form part of the decree and set-aside the impugned judgement and decree dated 11.02.2003 passed in Matrimonial Suit No. 653/99 (Dharmendra K. Rathaur Vs. Smt. Vineeta Rathaur).

¶56

In terms of the paragraph nos. 3 to 12 of the joint affidavit, we also quash the proceedings of following cases registered at the behest of the defendant/appellant against the plaintiff/respondent which are offshoots of the same matrimonial dispute between them :-

¶57

a) Case Crime No. 54 of 2006, P.S.- Kotwali, u/s 147, 323, 504 &

¶58

506 I.P.C., District- Kanpur Nagar.

¶59

b) Case Crime No. 329 of 2006, P.S.- Chakeri, u/s 323, 504 & 506

¶60

I.P.C., District- Kanpur Nagar.

¶61

c) Case Crime No. 131 of 2006, P.S.- Kidwai Nagar, u/s 323, 342 & 504 I.P.C., District- Kanpur Nagar.

¶62

Order Date :- 10.1.2020 SFH

Smt. Vineeta Rathaur v. Dharmendra K. Rathaur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Vineeta Rathaur v. Dharmendra K. Rathaur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S a K Overseas Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Anup Shukla Vs Smt. Kirti Sharma

Dr. Sahadev Krishna Chaturvedi Vs State of U.P. and Others

Krishna Nand Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Lachhi Ram Dharmshala Public Trust Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Gurjent Singh Vs Union of India and 2 Others