Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Varinder Kaur vs Jitender Kumar Verma on 11 April, 2017
Bench: Dipak Misra, A.M. Khanwilkar, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar
ITEM NO.20 COURT NO.2 SECTION IVB
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 35959/2016
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 21/10/2016
in RSA No. 4398/2016 passed by the High Court Of Punjab & Haryana
At Chandigarh)
VARINDER KAUR Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
JITENDER KUMAR VERMA AND ANR Respondent(s)
(with appln. (s) for exemption from filing O.T. and interim relief
and office report)
Date : 11/04/2017 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Jaspreet Singh Rai, Adv.
Mr. Harpuneet Singh Rai, Adv.
Mr. Rohit Nagpal, Adv.
Mr. Shyamal Kumar, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. Gaurav Chopra, Adv.
Karan Bharihoke, AOR
Mr. Kaustubh Anshuraj, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Heard Mr. Amit Sibal, learned senior counsel for the petitioner-wife and Mr. Gaurav Chopra, learned counsel for the respondents.
Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by GULSHAN KUMARThe present special leave petition arises from a civil ARORA Date: 2017.04.15 litigation pertaining to suit for possession. The trial court had 13:23:28 IST Reason:
decreed the suit in favour of the respondent No.1 and on an appeal being preferred by the petitioner, the lower appellate court 2 dismissed the First Appeal. In Second Appeal, the High Court has affirmed the same.
When the matter was listed before this Court on 3rd February, 2017, this Court had passed the following order:-
“Mr. Gaurav Chopra, learned cousnel appearing for the husband has handed over a cheque amounting to Rs.97,500/- (Rupees ninety seven thousand and five hundred only) to Mr. Jaspreet S. Rai, learned counsel assisting Mr. Siddharth Luthra, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner-wife. The computation of the arrears of maintenance shall be filed by the wife as well as by the husband by the next date of hearing.
As regards the rental charges, it is submitted by Mr. Gaurav Chopra, learned counsel appearing for the husband that he has found an apartment which is in the vicinity of the school where the child is studying. The details of the said apartment be handed over to Mr. Jaspreet S. Rai, learned counsel appearing for the wife. The husband will make arrangement for wife and her relations to visit the said apartment.
Let the matter be listed on 6.3.2017. In the meantime, the respondent-husband shall continue to pay the maintenance charges as directed by the court below.” On 7th March, 2017, a direction was issued to the respondent-husband to pay a sum of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) towards arrears of maintenance as claimed by the petitioner-wife.
On 29th March, 2017, the learned counsel for the parties fairly accepted the position that there is no possibility of settlement for sustaining the marriage between the husband and wife. Taking note of the said fact, the Court passed the following order:-
“In view of the aforesaid, learned counsel for the parties shall obtain further instructions with regard to the disposal of all the litigation pending between the parties and for fixing certain quantum towards permanent alimony on the 3 basis of dissolution of marriage. Needless to say, dissolution of marriage will be a part of the settlement.” Thereafter, certain discussions took place and, eventually, a settlement has been arrived at between the parties. The conditions that have been accepted by the parties are as follows:-
(i) The respondents, the husband and the father in-law shall pay a sum of Rs.1,05,00,000/- (Rupees one crore and five lac only) to the petitioner-wife within three months hence.
Out of the aforesaid amount, a sum of Rs.30,00,000/- (Rupees thirty lac only) be invested in the fixed deposit in the name of the daughter, which she will get after attaining the age of eighteen.
(ii) As the petitioner is in occupation of the part of the premises in question of which the father in-law is the owner, she shall vacate the same by end of October, 2017.
(iii) The time has been fixed as aforesaid, as a consensus has been arrived at by the wife to receive the money within three months.
(iv) The criminal litigation pending between the parties and their respective family members in any court of law shall be deemed to have been quashed.
(v) Any civil litigation pending between the parties and the family members as regards the guardianship, maintenance or properties shall be deemed to have been disposed of.
(vi) The petitioner-wife and the respondent-husband shall file a joint petition seeking for dissolution of marriage before the competent Family Court within three weeks hence and the learned Family Judge shall grant a decree for divorce after expiry of six months from its presentation.
4(vii) No application for extension shall be filed or entertained with regard to deposition of the amount or for filing the petition for dissolution of marriage on consent under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, or for vacating the premises in question.
(viii) As the entire controversy has been put to rest, neither the petitioner nor the respondents shall approach any legal forum with regard to any dispute between them.
The special leave petition is disposed of in terms of the aforesaid order. There shall be no order as to costs.
(Gulshan Kumar Arora) (H.S. Parasher)
Court Master Court Master