Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Smt. Priyanka vs Shivam Verma on 2 May, 2018
Author: Dinesh Mehta
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Misc. Application No. 18 / 2017
Smt. Priyanka W/o Sh. Shivam Verma, D/o Sh. Bhagwanlal, By
Caste Soni, present residing of 8, New Sadri Colony, Kalaji-Goraja,
Udaipur (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
Shivam Verma S/o sh. Mahendra, by Caste Soni, Resident of Near
Laxmi Printing Press, Bhavasarwada, Banswara (Raj.)
----Respondent
_____________________________________________________
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pradeep Shah
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anuj Sahlot
_____________________________________________________
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
02/05/2018
Mr. Pradeep Shah, learned counsel for the applicant submits
that in view of the offer made by the respondent - husband that
he would pay a lump-sum alimony of Rs.10,00,000/-, the
applicant - wife had given her consent in light whereof, this Court
had passed the order under consideration on 15.12.2015.
A perusal of the order under consideration reveals that while
transferring the Divorce Petition No.44/2014, this Court had
stayed the proceedings between the parties under Sections 498-A
IPC, 406 IPC and 125 Cr.P.C, till the Family Court, Udaipur decides
the application under Section 13 (B) of the Hindu Marriage Act,
proposed to be filed by the parties for dissolution of their
marriage.
Mr. Shah with pains submitted that the respondent -
(2 of 3)
[CMAP-18/2017]
husband has resiled from the assurance so given by him and
denied to pay the permanent alimony of Rs.10,00,000/-. He
submitted that the respondent has betrayed the applicant, and
hood winked the Court on the one end and on the other he is
taking advantage of the stay of the proceedings in the cases
pending against him, for the offence under Sections 498-A IPC
and 406 IPC so also the proceedings for grant of maintenance
under Section 125 Cr.P.C.
Mr. Shah contended that as the respondent - husband has
dubiously departed from the promise he had made, all those
proceedings deserve to be revived and stern action including the
proceedings for contempt needs to be taken against respondent.
Learned counsels for the parties inform that the matter
which had been transferred to Udaipur by virtue of the order dated
15.12.2015, is continuing before the Family Court, Udaipur and
the parties are contesting the same at Udaipur. Learned counsel
for the parties are ad-idem that the said proceedings may
continue at Family Court, Udaipur.
After hearing learned counsels for the parties and upon
perusal of the application filed by the petitioner, it is deemed
appropriate, expedient and in the interest of justice to recall the
order dated 15.12.2015 passed by this Court, in the manner that
all directions, contained in para No.5, 6 and 8 (except para No.7)
of the order are recalled.
Needless to observe that as a result of recalling of the order
dated 15.12.2015, in the manner indicated above, the
proceedings of the cases filed under Section 125 Cr.P.C and other
(3 of 3)
[CMAP-18/2017]
criminal proceedings, which had been stayed vide the said order,
shall stand resurrected.
The proceedings drawn by the Family Court, Udaipur in the
said case stand ratified as agreed by rival counsels for the parties,
notwithstanding the above-referred amendment/modification in
the order dated 15.12.2015.
The application stands disposed of.
(DINESH MEHTA), J.
Himanshu/- 26