MEENU NARULA Vs. SANJAY NARULA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Order XXIII Rule 3 jointly filed by the petitioners and the respondent. The petition was filed under Sections 18 and 20 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 and the same is pending before this Court. During the pendency of these proceedings the parties have decided to amicably settle the disputes amongst them and as per the settlement, the respondent has agreed to pay an amount of Rs.5 lacs to the petitioner No.1 in the manner indicated in paragraph 3 of the application. It is also agreed that the custody of the petitioner No.2, who is almost about 18 years of age, shall be with the respondent and the respondent shall secure admission of the petitioner No.2 in the Fashion and Designing Course at the Institute in Gurgaon and her entire maintenance and other expenses would be taken care of by the respondent as indicated in paragraph 4 of the application. The custody of the petitioner No. 3 shall continue to remain with the petitioner No.1 inasmuch as he is young boy of 8 years of age. However, the respondent has agreed to pay, additionally, a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month to the petitioner No.1 towards maintenance of the petitioner No.3. The petitioner No.3 will be studying in Dehradun and for this purpose he shall stay at the hostel there. It is also agreed that the matter pending before the Crime against Women Cell would be settled in terms of this compromise and, in case, there is any default then the same could be revived by the petitioner No.1.

(2.) This application is signed by the petitioner No.1 on her own behalf and on behalf of her minor children i.e., the petitioner Nos. 2 and 3. It is also signed by the respondent. The respondent appears in person and is identified by the petitioner No. 1, who, in turn, is identified by her learned counsel. The petitioner No.1 as well as the respondent have also filed affidavits in support of his application which is marked as Exhibit `C-1'. The other details of the settlement arrived at between the parties are recorded in the application itself. The undertakings given in paragraph 9 by the respondent are accepted by this Court.

(3.) I have heard the counsel for the petitioners as well as the respondent who appears in person and have also examined the terms of settlement which has been reduced to writing in the present application and I find that the same are lawful.