Delhi High Court - Orders
Rohit Chhabra vs State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr on 19 December, 2022
Author: Navin Chawla
Bench: Navin Chawla
$~1 (Spl. Bench)
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CM(M)-489/2019
ROHIT CHHABRA
..... Petitioners
Through: Ms.Sonika Tyagi, Adv.
versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Amit Gupta, Mr.Prateek Mehta,
Mr.Shiv Verma & Mr.Vikas, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
ORDER
% 19.12.2022
CM APPL. 29586/2022
1. This application has been filed by the petitioner praying for recall of the order of this Court dated 05.04.2021 and for releasing the petitioner from the statement made before this Court, wherein he inter-alia agreed to unconditionally transfer the flat at Princeton Estate in the name of the respondent no.2.
2. The order dated 05.04.2021 records as under:-
"1. The learned counsel for the petitioner on instructions from the petitioner, who is also present through video conferencing, submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to transfer the flat at Princeton Estate, which is the bone of contention between the parties, to the respondent. He is also willing to clear all the outstanding arrears of maintenance/alimony agreed to in the judgment and decree dated 05.04.2014 of the learned Family Court.Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RENUKA NEGI Signing Date:20.12.2022 17:36:07
He, however, requires sometime to clear the outstanding arrears. For the future maintenance/alimony, he requests that the parties be referred to mediation as the petitioner has undergone financial change since the time of passing of the decree of divorce.
2. In view of the above statement, the learned counsel for the respondent on instructions from the respondent, who is also present through video conferencing in Court, agrees that the parties be referred to the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre for exploring possibility of an amicable settlement for future maintenance/alimony.
3. On the petitioner paying a sum of Rs. 2.5 lacs to the respondent within a week from today and binding the petitioner to the statement made hereinabove, the parties are referred to the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre where they shall appear, presently through video conferencing, on 12th April, 2021 at 3:00 p.m.
4. List before this Court on 10th May, 2021."
3. It is the case of the petitioner/applicant that during the hearing conducted by virtual conferencing, it was decided that the petitioner shall transfer the flat at Princeton Estate to the respondent no.2, if she forgoes all her past and future arrears of maintenance as well as transfers the flat at Rose Wood City, Gurugram in the name of the petitioner/applicant. During the course of the hearing, the petitioner/applicant was asked if the petitioner/applicant would give some amount to the respondent no.2 to waive off all arrears, the petitioner/applicant agreed to pay Rs.2.5 Lakh to the same, however, due to some technical error in the network, he could not hear the entire order. On realising the mistake in the order, the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RENUKA NEGI Signing Date:20.12.2022 17:36:07 petitioner/applicant contacted his lawyer to seek clarification of the said order. In support, he places reliance on certain WhatsApp chats that were purportedly exchanged between himself and his counsel.
4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent no.2 submits that the petitioner is in a habit of wriggling out of the commitments made by him before the Court. He supports this assertion from the fact that the petitioner had earlier agreed to a consent decree of dissolution of the marriage being passed on 05.04.2014, wherein he not only agreed to the maintenance being paid to the respondent no.2, but also to transfer the flat at Princeton Estate to the respondent no.2. He, thereafter, tried to put the blame of the same to his then-counsel, which was rejected by the learned Executing Court in the order dated 07.02.2019 impugned in the present petition. Before this Court, the petitioner/applicant also made a categorical statement which is recorded in the order of this Court dated 05.04.2021. This time, the petitioner is trying to put the blame on the poor network.
5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties.
6. The order of this Court dated 05.04.2021 categorically records that the same has been passed on the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner/applicant and with the consent of the petitioner/applicant, who was appearing through virtual mode. It further records that the flat at Princeton Estate, which was agreed to be transferred to the respondent no.2 vide decree dated 05.04.2014, shall be duly transferred to the respondent no.2. The order further Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RENUKA NEGI Signing Date:20.12.2022 17:36:07 records that the arrears of maintenance/alimony shall also be cleared. It was only the further maintenance/alimony which was referred to the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre (in short, 'Mediation Centre') for exploring the possibility of arriving at an amicable settlement. The petitioner was put to a condition of payment of Rs.2.5 Lakh within a week of the said order and binding the petitioner/applicant to the statement made, the parties were referred to the Mediation Centre. The petitioner complied with this condition alone.
7. I see no reason, therefore, to recall the order dated 05.04.2021, that was passed with the consent of the petitioner. The petitioner cannot wriggle out of the statement made before this Court as and when it suits/does not suit him.
8. The application is dismissed. The petitioner shall pay a cost of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) to the respondent no.2. CM(M)-489/2019
9. List on 12th January, 2023 before the Roster Bench.
NAVIN CHAWLA, J DECEMBER 19, 2022/rv Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RENUKA NEGI Signing Date:20.12.2022 17:36:07