The appellant appealed against the dismissal of her mutual consent divorce petition. The appeal was decided where both parties volunteered fresh statements agreeing to dissolve the marriage and claim the return of deposited funds.
A decree of divorce by mutual consent was drawn; the FDR of Rs. 4,50,000 was directed to be handed over to the appellant.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh
FAO No. M-172 of 2009 (O&M)
Baljit Kaur
Pargat Singh
..... Appellant vs ..... Respondent
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal
Present: Mr. D. S. Pheruman, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. J. S. Verka, Advocate, for the respondent.
Rajesh Bindal J.
Challenge in the present appeal is to the judgment of the learned court below whereby joint petition filed by the parties under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for divorce by mutual consent was dismissed as after recording the initial statement, the respondent later on backed out therefrom and stated that initial statement was made by him under coercion and he wanted to resettle in life with the appellant. Considering the aforesaid facts, the divorce petition was dismissed by the learned court below and the FDR of Rs. 4,50,000/towards the grant of permanent alimony settled between the parties and deposited in the court below in the name of appellant Baljit Kaur, was directed to be returned to respondent Pargat Singh.
Both the parties are present in person in court today. The respondent stated that even after the statement made by him in the court below on 11.9.2008, the parties did not live together even for a single day and he is agreeable to the terms on which the parties had settled their dispute and agreed to dissolve the marriage by way of mutual consent. His statement to that effect has been recorded separately. He further stated that the FDR of Rs. 4,50,000/- still lying in the court below be handed over to the appellant. He has no objection in case the decree of divorce by mutual consent is passed.
The appellant who is present in court stated that on receipt of FDR lying deposited in the court below in her name, all her claims against the respondent regarding the marriage in dispute shall stand settled.
In terms of the statements of the parties, the marriage between them is dissolved by way of mutual consent. A decree of divorce in terms thereof be drawn. The appeal stands allowed in the above terms.
8.12.2009 vs
( Rajesh Bindal) Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appeal against the dismissal of mutual consent divorce petition should be allowed given the parties' reconciled statements.
Whether the joint winding up of the marriage dispute allows the grant of a fresh decree of divorce.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Baljit Kaur
Pargat Singh
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
