Allowed

Anil Kumar Das v. Smt Mamta Kumari

Jharkhand HC7 Jul 2023Cr.Rev./227/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court allowed a criminal revision petition challenging a maintenance order where the parties filed a joint compromise application agreeing to a one-time settlement of Rs. 36 lakh, full and final waiver of future claims, and mutual divorce.

What did the court decide?

The impugned maintenance order was modified to permit the payment of Rs. 36 lakh as full and final settlement; the maintenance claim is waived; the parties are directed to file a mutual divorce petiti

Anil Kumar Das Vs Smt Mamta Kumari — Maintenance and Alimony | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Revision No. 227 of 2020

¶2

….

¶3

Anil Kumar Das …… Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

Smt. Mamta Kumari

¶6

Suhani Kumari

¶7

Samiksha Kumari …… Opp. Parties

¶8

-----

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD

¶10

----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Akhori Awinash Kumar, Advocate For the O. P. No. 1 : Mrs. Aanya Singh, Advocate

¶11

I. A. No. 5807 of 2023

¶12

23/07.07.2023 The instant Criminal Revision No. 227 of 2020 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner challenging the judgment dated 14.11.2019 passed in Original Maintenance Case No. 212 of 2018 by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi by which learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi has directed the petitioner to pay maintenance of Rs. 10,000/- to his wife i.e. opposite party no. 1 and Rs. 5,000/- each opposite party no. 2, Suhani Kumari and opposite party no. 3, Samiksha Kumari (daughters of opposite party no. 1) and it was further directed that the entire amount of Rs. 20,000/- shall be paid from the date of filing of this case i.e. 19.07.2018 by 10^th of every month in the saving bank account of the petitioner no. 1 or through money order. Learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi has further directed the petitioner to continue to pay the fee of both his daughter and also deposit Rs. 3000/- in Sukanaya Samriddhi Yojana as he is doing at present. It was also directed that the petitioner shall ensure regular meeting of father (Opposite Party) and both the daughters regularly, at least twice a month and also on festivals and family subject to mutual get together convenience and the arrear of maintenance shall be paid in 24 equal

¶13

-2-

¶14

instalments.

¶15

2. The instant Criminal Revision Application has been filed in the year 2020 and it was heard several times before the Coordinate Bench of this Court and also before this Court and it was referred for mediation and on failure of mediation, the case was heard on its own merit and the order was reserved on 29.03.2023 and thereafter it was mentioned by filing mentioning slip on behalf of the petitioner stating therein that the case has been compromised between the parties and thereafter the matter was listed on 30.06.2023 before this Court and it was fixed on 07.07.2023 for filing joint compromise petition.

¶16

Pursuant to the order of this Court, the petitioner- Amit Kumar Das and the opposite party no. 1- Mamta Kumari are present in Court today and they have admitted the compromise and contents of the I.A. No. 5807 of 2023. 4. I. A. No. 5807 of 2023 has been filed on behalf of both the sides by way of a joint compromise application. 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for opposite party no. 2.

¶17

It has been submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the case has been compromised between the petitioner and the opposite party no. 1 and the matter has been settled and they have filed joint compromise petition being I. A. No. 5807 of 2023 and the petitioner is ready to pay Rupees Thirty Six Lakh (Rs. 36,00,000/-) to the opposite party no. 1 by way of one time full and final settlement as per the certain terms and conditions mentioned in I. A. No. 5807 of 2023 at para 1 to 3 (III) to (XIII). It is submitted that the petitioner- Amit Kumar Das is paying Rs. 10,00,000/- to the opposite party no. 1, Mamta Kumari today by way of Demand Draft in compliance of the terms and

¶18

-3-

¶19

conditions of I.A. No. 5808 of 2023. It is submitted that in view of the compromise between the parties, the case may be disposed of and this Criminal Revision Application may be allowed.

¶20

On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has admitted the factum of compromise between the petitioner and the opposite party no.2. It has been submitted that opposite party has no objection if this Criminal Revision is allowed.

¶21

Perused the records of this case and I. A. No. 5807 of 2023 and considered the submission of both the sides.

¶22

Para- 6 of (I) to (XIII) of the I. A. No. 5807 of 2023 are as follows:-

¶23

“(i) Both the parties hereto confirm and declare that they have voluntarily and of their own free will have decided not to live together as husband and wife and have arrived at this settlement in the presence of their respective counsels.

¶24

(ii) The petitioner in view of the compromise has agreed to pay a sum of Rs. 36,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty-Six Lakh) to the opposite party No.1 and his children i.e., O.P. NO.2 & 3 by way of demand draft within six months in three instalments from the date of filing of the instant interlocutory application which are as follows:

¶25

Rs. 10,00,000/- (Ten Lakhs Only) to the O.P. NO.1 at the time of disposal of the instant criminal revision.

¶26

Rs. 10,00,000/- (Ten Lakhs Only) to the O.P. NO.1 at the time of admission of the mutual consent divorce case or at 1st Motion of the petition.

¶27

Rs. 16,00,000/- (Sixteen Lakhs Only) and Sukanya Yojna Passbook to the O.P. No.1 at the time of final order of the divorce decree or the 2nd Motion. (iii) That petitioner, apart from Rs. 36,00,000/- also undertake to handover the Sukanya Yojna running in the name of daughter of the petitioner i.e., O.P. No. 2 & 3.

¶28

(iv) Both the parties have amicably settled and agreed to file the mutual divorce without any further terms, alimony or any such claim and to obtain decree of divorce.

¶29

(v) Both the parties herein agree that all pending cases whether specifically

¶30

-4-

¶31

mentioned above or not between the parties herein shall be withdrawn. The parties undertake not to initiate any other litigation against each other and their family members / witnesses / in future also. It is necessary to mention here that except above, whatever / wherever the cases may be filed by the parties will be subject matter of this settlement which is not specifically mentioned. Both parties have also agreed that Mutual Divorce cost would be borne by both parties, without any further delay.

¶32

(vi) That O.P. No.1 claims the custody of the children i.e., O.P. NO.2 & 3, which is also agreeable tothe petitioner and O.P. No.1 has taken the full responsibility of both the children.

¶33

(vii) That both the parties l.e., petitioner and O.P. NO. 1 agrees that after receiving the settlement amount O.P. No.1 namely Mamta Kumari will be solely responsible for the development, education, health care and marriage of both the daughters i.e., O.P. No.2 & 3.

¶34

(viii) The parties declare that this full and final settlement cum understanding has been entered into by their free will and both the parties will abide by terms and conditions of the same.

¶35

(ix) That the parties agree to act in good faith in relation to performance of each party's obligations under this agreement and they will avoid to make any false statement against each other.

¶36

(x) Both parties agree to cooperate with each other and do all acts required to give effect to the terms of this settlement agreement.

¶37

(xi) Both the parties have agreed that their life will be independent and they can get married of their choice and no hindrance or any such tactics should be done to affect each other's life.

¶38

(xii) Both the parties i.e., petitioner namely Anil Kumar Das and O.P. No. 1 to 3 namely wife Mamta Kumari and two daughters namely Suhani Sristi and Samiksha Sristi have agreed that they will not demand any kind of property, claim, streedhan, maintenance, arrear arising out of the impugned order 14.11.2019 and whatsoever in future.

¶39

(xiii) Both the parties have also agreed that after the disposal of the instant criminal revision application, both the parties will file mutual divorce petition without any further delay within one month.”

¶40

It transpires that the case has been compromised between the petitioner and the opposite party no. 2 on the certain terms and conditions as has been mentioned in I. A. No. 5807 of 2023 and signed by Mr. Akhouri Awinash Kumar, learned counsel for the

¶41

-5-

¶42

petitioner and Mrs. Anaya, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 1 and affidavit has been sworn by Anil Kumar Das i.e. the petitioner admitting the terms and conditions of the compromise and enclosed the copy of the AADHAR Card and opposite party no. 1, Mamta Kumar has also sworn the affidavit and has admitted the contents of I.A. No. 5807 of 2023.

¶43

Under the circumstances, I. A. No. 5807 of 2023 is allowed and the impugned judgment dated 14.11.2019 passed in Original Maintenance Case No. 212 of 2018 by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi is modified to the extent that the petitioner shall pay Rupees Thirty Six Lakh (Rs. 36,00,000/-) to the opposite party no. 1 by way of compensation and settlement in light of undertaking mentioned in para-6 of (ii) to (iii) of the I. A. No. 5807 of 2023 towards full and final settlement to the opposite party no. 1 and her two daughters i.e. opposite party no. 2, Suhani Kumari and opposite party no. 3, Samiksha Kumari.

¶44

The petitioner- Amit Kumar Das has handed over the Demand Draft of Rs. 10,00,000/- in Court to the O. P. No. 1, Smt. Mamta Kumari in compliance of the undertakings given in para 6(ii) of the I. A. No. 5807 of 2023.

¶45

Accordingly, this Criminal Revision No. 227 of 2020 is allowed in terms of compromise and stands disposed of.

¶46

I. A. No. 5807 of 2023 is also allowed and stands disposed of.

¶47

(Sanjay Prasad, J.)

¶48

Kamlesh/

Anil Kumar Das v. Smt Mamta Kumari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Kumar Das v. Smt Mamta Kumari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Khirod Gope Vs State of Jharkhand

Bivash Chandra Thakur Vs the State of Jharkhand

Gopal Prasad Gupta And Anr. Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Sanju Oraon Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pormani Kunkal Alias Pramanik Kunkal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mukesh Kumar Saw Alias Mukesh Saw Vs the State of Jharkhand