PRINYANKA KHANNA Vs. AMIT KHANNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The parties have been litigating in one forum or the other since the year 2005 and as of today twelve cases of various types are pending, some filed by the appellant and the others by the respondent-husband. The disputes have finally been settled between the parties and a compromise deed has been put on record on page 164 of the paper book. Under this compromise the respondent- husband has agreed to pay a sum of Rs. 2,25,000,00/- (rupees two crores and twenty five lakhs) to the appellant as full and final settlement of all disputes with the clear understanding that all litigations pending between them (civil and criminal) will terminate. Pursuant to the compromise the respondent-husband has paid a sum of rupees seventy five lakhs vide bank draft dated 29th August, 2011 and another sum of rupees seventy five lakhs has also been paid today in Court by a 'Pay Order' (No. 137954) of Standard Chartered Bank dated 30th August, 2011 whereas a post-dated cheque (No. 105860) dated 11th September, 2011 has also been handed over to the appellant in Court today.

(2.) The appellant states that she is satisfied with the payments she has received and she does not wish to pursue the matter any further. The parties have also filed an application under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking a dissolution of the marriage. In this application details of the various litigations pending between the parties have been set out in paragraph 12. These are reproduced below :

(3.) We also see from paragraph 12(g) that reference has been made to a petition for divorce filed by the respondent husband against the appellant which is now fixed for hearing on the 16th September, 2011. In terms of the consent memo filed between the parties all the litigations between them have to be terminated. A prayer has accordingly been made that as the respondent husband has made the entire payment to the Appellant, the entire dispute should be settled here and now. We accordingly put it up to the parties (who are present in-person) as to whether we should terminate the disputes between them by passing appropriate orders.