This judgment disposed of an appeal posted against a divorce petition by recording a mutual consent decree between parties who had mutually agreed to divorce after mediation, with the husband depositing maintenance funds.
Decree of divorce by mutual consent passed; husband's deposited amount directed to be paid to wife.
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.
FAO No. M-4 of 2009
-1-
In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh
FAO No. M-4 of 2009 (O&M)
Date of decision : 21.4.2010
Prem Kumar
... Appellant
vs
Kiran Bala
.... Respondent
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal
Present: Mr. S. K. Arora, Advocate, for the appellant/husband.
Mr. Inderpreet Singh Kohli, Advocate, for the respondent-wife.
Rajesh Bindal J.
Initially the appeal was filed by the husband against the dismissal of the petition filed by him seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion. During the pendency of the appeal, the matter was referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre in this court where the parties mutually agreed to part ways by getting a decree of divorce by way of mutual consent.
Briefly, the facts of the case are that the marriage of the parties was solemnised as per Hindu Rites in the month of October 2003 at Moga. No child was born out of the wedlock.
Today both the parties were present in Court. It is the admitted case of the parties that they are living separate since 29.7.2004. Petition for divorce was filed by the husband in the year 2006 initially on the ground of cruelty and desertion. During the pendency of the appeal efforts were made to reconcile the matter but without any result. The matter was referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre in the High Court, where the matter was compromised on 9.11.2009. In terms of the compromise, both the parties decided to get a decree of divorce by way of mutual consent. In terms of the agreement/compromise dated 9.11.2009, the husband has deposited Rs. 2,75,000/- with the registry of this court as past, present and future maintenance. As per the compromise, the wife will not claim any amount as maintenance from husband Prem Kumar. There is no litigation either civil
FAO No. M-4 of 2009
-2-
or criminal pending between the parties except the appeal mentioned above against the rejection of the divorce petition and one application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. at Moga. The wife has agreed that she will withdraw the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. In terms of the compromise criminal complaint filed by Kiran Bala against Prem Kumar and his family members has already been quashed by this court vide order dated 9.3.2010 passed in Criminal Misc. No. M-35503 of 2009. The parties have no objection in case a decree of divorce by way of mutual consent is passed. Joint statement of the parties to this effect has also been recorded separately. The statement of both the parties was not found to be under any pressure or coercion.
Considering the aforesaid facts and finding the statement to be bonafide, a decree of divorce by way of mutual consent is passed, dissolving the marriage of Prem Kumar son of Ratti Ram and Kiran Bala daughter of Hari Krishan. The amount deposited by the husband in this court shall be paid to the wife by way of demand draft.
The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. Decree sheet be
prepared.
21.4.2010 vs.
( Rajesh Bindal) Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a decree of divorce by mutual consent can be granted under Section 13B HMA when parties agree to part ways.
Whether the statements of parties recorded by the court were voluntary and free from coercion, pressure, or compulsion.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Prem Kumar
Kiran Bala
Rajesh Bindal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
