Disposed

Ashutosh S/O Vitthalrao Wikhar v. Sau. Priti W/O Ashutosh Wikhar and Others

Bombay HC9 Apr 2014FA/557/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court at Nagpur granted leave under Order 32 Rule 7 CPC for a respondent to compromise on behalf of minor daughters in a mother's maintenance suit. The court also disposed of two first appeals and a cross objection by accepting a recorded settlement agreement for dissolution of marriage.

What did the court decide?

Leave granted to enter into compromise on behalf of minors; First Appeals and Cross Objection disposed of per settlement; marriage dissolved; decree to be drawn.

Ashutosh S/O Vitthalrao Wikhar Vs Sau. Priti W/O… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

0904fa557-558.13

¶2

¶3

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No . IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

¶4

FIRST APPEAL NO. 557 OF 2013

¶5

Ashutosh Vitthalrao Wikhar VERSUS Priti Ashutosh Wikhar & Ors. FIRST APPEAL NO. 558 OF 2013

¶6

Ashutosh Vitthalrao Wikhar VERSUS Priti Ashutosh Wikhar

¶7

- - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶8

¶9

Shri M. G. Bhangde Sr. Counsel with Shri R. M. Bhangde counsel for the appellant.

¶10

Shri H.Dangre counsel for the respondents.

¶11

CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK AND A. S. CHANDURKAR, JJ. DATE : APRIL 09, 2014 .

¶12

The learned counsel for the parties have tendered an application in First Appeal No. 557 of 2013 and a common application in First Appeal Nos. 557 and 558 of 2013 and Cross Objection No. 64 of 2013. The same are accepted on record.

¶13

Civil Application in First Appeal No. 557 of 2013 :

¶14

By this Civil Application the respondent no.1 seeks leave under the provisions of Order 32 Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure to the respondent no.1 to enter into a compromise on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 and 3.

¶15

The First Appeal arises from the judgment of the Family Court in a petition filed by the respondents under Section 18 of the Hindu Adoptions And Maintenance Act. Since the respondent nos. 2 and 3 are the minor daughters of the appellant and the respondent no.1 and since according to

¶16

0904fa557-558.13

¶17

¶18

the parties, the parties have entered into a settlement, which is in the interest and for the benefit of the respondent nos. 2 and 3 it would be necessary to grant leave in terms of the provisions of Order 32 Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

¶19

We have perused the Civil Application and the contents of paragraph 2 thereof. On a reading of the contents of paragraph 2 of the civil application we find that the terms mentioned therein are in the interest of the respondent nos. 2 and 3 and are beneficial to them. In all, the respondent nos. 2 and 3 would be receiving property and amount to the extent of Rs. 57,00,000/- (Fifty Seven Lacs). We find that the terms of the settlement in paragraph 2 of the civil application appear to be fair and reasonable.

¶20

Hence, the leave as prayed by the respondent no. 1 under the provision of Order 32 Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure is granted to the respondent no.1 to enter into a compromise on behalf of the respondent nos. 2 and 3. The civil application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and disposed of.

¶21

Civil Application in First Appeal No. 557 of 2013, Cross Objection No. 64 of 2013 & First Appeal No. 558 of 2013 :

¶22

By this Civil Application the parties seek the disposal of the appeals in terms of the settlement recorded in the application.

¶23

The application for recording of the compromise is signed by the appellant and the respondent no.1 as also by their counsel. The appellant and the respondent no.1 are personally present in the Court today. So also, the father of

¶24

0904fa557-558.13

¶25

¶26

the appellant and the father of the respondent no.1 are also present in the Court today. We have personally talked with the parties and inquired whether they have agreed to enter into an compromise on the terms mentioned in the application. The parties state that they are ad-idem on the terms mentioned in the application for recording the compromise.

¶27

We have perused the terms on which the parties have agreed to settle the dispute and have further agreed to dissolve the marriage solemnized between them on 16^th January 2001. The terms mentioned in the application are just and reasonable.

¶28

Hence, both the First Appeals as also the Cross Objection are disposed of in terms of the compromise. The marriage between the parties stands dissolved in terms of the settlement. A decree be drawn in terms of the settlement. There would be no order as to costs.

¶29

JUDGE

¶30

JUDGE

¶31

svk

Ashutosh S/O Vitthalrao Wikhar v. Sau. Priti W/O Ashutosh Wikhar and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashutosh S/O Vitthalrao Wikhar v. Sau. Priti W/O Ashutosh Wikhar and Others

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

Anand Dnyan Shikshan Sanstha through President Shri Satyawan Namdeo Ajabale Vs the State of Maharashtra through Secretary Ministry of Sport and Education and Others

Subhash S/O Moreshwar Patil Vs Sau Vandana W/O Subhash Patil (Hage) and Another

Maharashtra State Cooperative Cotton Growers Marketing Federation Ltd. Thr. Its Managing Director Vs Employees State Insurance Corporation Thr. Sub-Regional Officer and 5 Othrs

Rajendra Shankarrao Satputaley Vs Central Bank of India through Its Chief Manager-Hrd and Others

Ku.Rupali Chatarsing Ingale(Thakur). Vs the Committee for Scrutiny and Verification of Tribe Claims,Amravati and 2 Ors.

Pravin S/O Shreepatrao Sheware Vs Alka W/O Pravin Sheware