Sheela Ravindra Khadse Vs Dr. Ravindra Shankarrao… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2024)

Sheela Ravindra Khadse Vs Dr. Ravindra Shankarrao… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Bombay HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Marriage between the appellant and respondent declared dissolved with immediate effect on the second motion; compromise exhibit 'X' made part of the decree, excluding clause (IV) (waiver of maintenance rights of the minor daughters), which learned advocates of both sides unanimously agreed would not form part of the settlement

Issue for consideration

Whether the appeal against refusal of divorce on grounds of cruelty and desertion may be disposed of as a divorce by mutual consent by accepting the second motion in terms of the settlement reached during pendency +1 more

Court's answer

More than six months had lapsed since the terms of compromise were settled and filed; therefore the second motion deserved to be accepted

Ratio / Principle

The stipulation in clause (IV) of the compromise deed, waiving maintenance rights on behalf of the two minor daughters, is against their interest and unconscionable; it cannot be allowed to remain part of the settlement as nothing in the deed secures the minors' interest

Key takeaways

Treading the proceedings as a petition under Section 13 B of the Hindu Marriage Act and since the cooling-off period was over, the Court declared the marriage dissolved with immediate effect; the compromise (exhibit 'X') forms part of the decree excluding clause (IV)ratio¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench — Family Court Appeal No. 32 of 2020 (decided 06 August 2024; Mangesh S. Patil & Shailesh P. Brahme, JJ., per court). Wife's appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act against a judgment and order refusing divorce on grounds of cruelty and desertion under Section 31 (a) (1) (b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. During pendency the parties settled and agreed to seek divorce by mutual consent; terms verified before the Registrar (Judicial) and minutes recorded on 01 November 2023. On the second motion, with more than six months elapsed since the compromise terms were settled and filed, the Court treaded the proceedings as a petition under Section 13 B of the Hindu Marriage Act and declared the marriage dissolved with immediate effect, the compromise (exhibit 'X') forming part of the decree. Clause (IV) of the deed — whereby the appellant wife, as guardian, gave up any right of maintenance on behalf of the two minor daughters Aishwarya and Deepika — was held unconscionable and against the minors' interest; learned advocates of both sides, in the presence of the parties, unanimously submitted that the clause shall not be part of the settlement, and it was excluded from the decree. Married 14 May 2006; separated since before the 2017 divorce petition.

2024:BHC-AUG:17228-DB

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

907 FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO. 32 OF 2020

SHEELA RAVINDRA KHADSE VERSUS

DR. RAVINDRA SHANKARRAO KHADSE

Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Gawali Amol K. Advocate for Respondent : Mrs. Manjusha Narwade

CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL & SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ. DATE : 06 AUGUST 2024

PER COURT :

Heard both the sides.

This is an appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, whereby, the wife is taking exception to the judgment and order refusing to grant divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion as contemplated under Section 31 (a) (1) (b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

During pendency of the appeal, the couple has entered into a settlement. The terms of compromise have also been placed on record after due verification before the Registrar (Judicial). They, inter alia, have agreed to seek divorce by mutual consent in

2

this very appeal. The minutes were also recorded on 01 November 2023.

The second motion is now being moved by both the sides seeking a final order in terms of the compromise ‘X’.

There is no dispute about the fact that the couple got married on 14 May 2006 and have been separate since before filing of the divorce petition in the year 2017. A period of more than six months has already lapsed, since the terms of compromise have been settled and filed. Motion deserves to be accepted.

However, taking into account the fact that the compromise deed contains, inter alia, a stipulation in clause no. (IV) stating that the appellant wife is giving no right of maintenance on behalf of Aishwarya and Deepika, the two minor daughters as their guardian, in our considered view, the stipulation is against the interest of the minor daughters. The condition is unconscionable and cannot be allowed to be a part of settlement. There is nothing in the compromise deed to secure their interest.

Learned Advocates of both the sides in presence of the appellant and the respondent unanimously submit this term / clause (IV) shall not be a part of the settlement.

3

In view of above, by treading the present proceedings as a petition under Section 13 B of the Hindu Marriage Act and since the cooling off period is over, we declare the marriage between the two stands dissolved with immediate effect. The compromise (exhibit ‘X’) shall from part of the decree, excluding clause (IV).

[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J. ] [ MANGESH S. PATIL, J. ]

Thakur-Chauhan/-