Allowed

Jagdish Chand v. Poornima Alias Poonam

Himachal Pradesh HC20 Nov 2017FAO/75/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Himachal Pradesh allowed the appellant's appeal for divorce and set aside the impugned judgment quashing it. The court approved an amicable settlement reached through mediation where the appellant agreed to pay Rs. 9 lac as permanent alimony via cash and cheques, with liability for prosecution under the Contempt of Courts Act for non-payment.

What did the court decide?

Divorce decree passed in favour of appellant; impugned judgment set aside; appellant ordered to pay Rs. 9 lac alimony per settlement terms; liability for contempt for non-payment.

Jagdish Chand Vs Poornima Alias Poonam — Maintenance and Alimony | Himachal Pradesh HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA

¶2

FAO No.75/2017 Decided on :20/11/2017

¶3

__________________________________________________________ Jagdish Chand …..Appellant Versus Poornima alias Poonam ….Respondent

¶4

Coram:

¶5

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge .

¶6

Whether approved for reporting?¹

¶7

For the appellant: Mr. Dibender Ghosh, Advocate. For the respondent: Mr. Shanti Swaroop, Advocate. __________________________________________________________

¶8

Tarlok Singh Chauhan (oral):

¶9

Looking to the nature of the order I propose to pass, it

¶10

is not necessary to delve into the facts of the case, in detail.

¶11

Suffice it to observe that the marriage inter se the parties was solemnized in the month of June 2009 and ever since that time on account of estranged relationship, they have been living apart. The appellant filed the petition under Sections 12 and 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for divorce against the respondent before the learned District Judge, Shimla, however the same was dismissed vide judgment dated 29.12.2016, constraining him to file the instant appeal.

¶12

1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶13

…2…

¶14

Initially, efforts for reconciliation were tried by a coordinate bench of this Court, however, on failure of the same, the matter was ordered to be listed before another bench. It is thereafter that this case came up for consideration before this Court on 8.8.2017 and the following order came to be passed:

¶15

“Looking into the nature of the dispute, I feel that this is a fit case where mediation ought to be tried. Accordingly, Sh. S.C. Sharma, Advocate, is appointed as Mediator. Both the parties to appear before the learned Mediator on 18.8.2017 at 2.00 p.m. in the Mediation Centre, High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla. Registry to make available the case file.”

¶16

It is heartening to note that with the earnest efforts

¶17

made by the learned Mediator, the parties have though not decided to live together, however, they have voluntarily decided to part ways after a golden handshake.

¶18

On 1.11.2017, the appellant made a voluntary statement before the learned Mediator that he is ready and willing to pay Rs.9 lac as a permanent alimony to the respondent by way of full and final settlement, out of which he would pay Rs.6 lac on 22.11.2017 by cash or through any other mode of payment while the balance amount of Rs. 3 lac would be paid in two installments – Rs.1 lac on 31.1.2020 and Rs.2 lac on

¶19

…3…

¶20

30.10.2020 by way of post-dated cheques. His statement was recorded separately and put across to the respondent, who accepted the same and even got her statement to that effect recorded separately.

¶21

The appellant, as undertaken before the learned Mediator, has handed over a cheque of Rs.6 lac to the respondent in the open court today, hence part of the undertaking as given by him stands complied with. Therefore, in view of the aforesaid developments, the impugned judgment dated 29.12.2016 is set aside and the petition (HMA Case No.22S/3 of 2014) filed by the appellant is allowed subject to the following conditions:

¶22

That the appellant would make payment of Rs.1

¶23

lac to the respondent on or before 30.1.2020 and the balance amount of Rs.2 lac on or before 30.10.2020 by way of post-dated cheques. The payment can be made either in cash or through any other valid mode.

¶24

In the event of cheque(s) or any other negotiable instrument(s) not being honoured including the one handed over today, the appellant, apart

¶25

…4…

¶26

from any action that may be initiated against him, shall be liable for being prosecuted and punished under the Contempt of Courts Act.

¶27

7 All the proceedings inter se the parties pending before

¶28

any other Court with the passing of this order are deemed to have been closed/dismissed.

¶29

8 The appeal is disposed of in the aforesaid terms and accordingly decree of divorce is passed in favour of the appellant. Copies of the statements of the parties and order passed by the learned Mediator shall form part and parcel of the decree. Pending application(s), if any, is also disposed of. Parties to bear their own costs.

¶30

Before parting, this Court places on record its gratitude for the valuable service rendered by Sh. S.C. Sharma, Advocate in bringing about the amicable settlement between the parties.

¶31

(Tarlok Singh Chauhan) Judge 20^th November, 2017 (pankaj)

Jagdish Chand v. Poornima Alias Poonam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagdish Chand v. Poornima Alias Poonam

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

Savitri Devi Vs National Insurance Company Ltd.

Gian Dass Vs Daulat Ram

Gurpreet Singh @ Gogi Vs State of Hp

Abhilasha Vs Man Singh

Girja Nand Vs Chet Ram

Brij Lal Vs State of Hp