QUEENY PRADHAN Vs. RAKESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Pursuant to the order dated 7.9.2015, Ms. Manita Verma, Advocate is present along with the defendant and explains her absence in the Court yesterday by submitting that the defendant had informed her that he would appear in the case on his own. She submits that she was not aware of the fact that the defendant had engaged some other counsel to appear for him in the case.

(2.) On the first call, the case was passed over to enable the parties to resolve some minor issues raised by the defendant in the First Motion for divorce drafted by the plaintiff's counsel. On the second call, counsels for the parties jointly state, on instructions, that the issues raised by the defendant have been satisfactorily addressed and both the parties have signed the newly drafted First Motion, original whereof has been handed over to the plaintiff's counsel. They state that now the Settlement Agreement dated 13.5.2015 be taken on record and the suit be decreed in terms thereof.

(3.) Upon the parties being referred to the mediation, they have been able to negotiate a settlement before the Delhi High Court Mediation & Conciliation Centre, reduced into writing on 13.5.2015. The terms and conditions of the settlement have been set out in para 10 of the Agreement, whereunder both the parties have agreed that they shall file a joint application for dissolution of marriage by mutual consent before the competent court on or before 23.5.2015.