Allowed

Noshir P. Katrak v. and Rashna N. Katrak

Bombay HC16 Dec 2005PS/32/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a suit for divorce by mutual consent, both parties appeared confirming incompatible temperaments. The court accepted filed consent terms including a Rs.5 lakh alimony payment, decreed the suit under Sec.32-B, and disposed of the matter with no order as to costs.

What did the court decide?

Decree of divorce passed. Cheque of Rs.5 lacs presented to plaintiff No.2. Suit disposed with no order as to costs.

Noshir P. Katrak Vs and Rashna N. Katrak — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2005)

¶1

IN THE PARSI CHIEF MATRIMONIAL COURT AT BOMBAY

¶2

 SUIT NO. 32 OF 2005

¶3

 Noshir Phiroze Katrak,
 At 29-A, Rosary House,
 Gunpowder Road, Mazgaon,
 Mumbai - 400 010. ... Plaintiff No.1.

¶4

And

¶5

 Rashna Noshir Katrak,
 At Maker Towers, "L" - 121,
 Cuffe Parade, Mumbai - 400 005. .... Plaintiff No.2.

¶6

 Ms. A.S. Khushrushahi for the plaintiff No.1.

¶7

 Ms. Pooja Jalan for the plaintiff No.2.

¶8

 Both plaintiffs present in the Court.

¶9

CORAM: P.V. KAKADE, J.

¶10

DATED: 16TH DEC., 2005

¶11

P.C.:

¶12

 1. The suit is filed for decree of divorce dissolving
 the marriage by mutual consent as contemplated under
 Sec.32-B of the Parsi Marriage & Divorce Act, 1936

¶13

 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act).

¶14

 2. Both plaintiffs are present before the Court and
 submit that they were married on 16.1.2004 according to
 Parsi Zoroastrian rites and customs. They lived
 together as husband and wife till 1.10.2004, however,

¶15

¶16

 they found that the marriage was not compatible and
 their temperaments were totally different because of
 which there were regular clashes between the parties and
 despite of best efforts to reconcile the dispute, they
 could not do so and seek divorce by dissolving the
 marriage, by consent. There are no issues of the said
 marriage. Hence the petition.

¶17

 3. In answer to the queries made by the Court, they had
 submitted that they have filed the consent terms
 voluntarily and they wish to seek decree of divorce
 under Sec.32-B of the said Act. The consent terms filed
 at Exh.B show that the plaintiff No.1 has agreed and
 undertaken to the Court to pay the plaintiff No.2 a sum
 of Rs.5 lacs as and by way of permanent lumpsum alimony.

¶18

 4. The learned counsel for the plaintiff No.1 has
 presented a cheque of Rs.5 lacs to the Court to be paid
 to the plaintiff No.2 towards alimony. It is also
 submitted in the consent terms that parties have
 exchanged their personal belongings including jewellery
 and have settled all other issues before filing of the
 plaint.

¶19

 5. In view of this position, I do not see any reason

¶20

¶21

 why the decree should not be passed as prayed for.

¶22

 6. Hence, the suit stands decreed in terms of prayer
 clauses (a) & (b).

¶23

 The cheque of Rs.5 lacs is presented to the plaintiff
 No.2 in presence of the Court and with this observation
 the suit stands disposed of with no order as to costs.

Noshir P. Katrak v. and Rashna N. Katrak

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Noshir P. Katrak v. and Rashna N. Katrak

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raju Vithoba Sukhdare Vs the Greater Bombay Co-Op. Bank Ltd. and Anr.

Maharashtra Industrial Dev.Corpn. and Ors. Vs Oceana Textile Mills Pvt.Ltd.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Bhauso Ramchandra Mane and Anr.

Rohinton F. Anklesaria Vs and Tanaz R. Anklesaria

Kainaz E. Wadia Vs Eric K. Wadia

Cyrus Shavak Patel Vs and Erzaan Cyrus Patel