MANJULA D BORAL Vs. DILIP JYOTI PRAKASH BORAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the mother of two minor children a son Bhriguraj boni on 5th Dec. 1975 and another son Nandraj born on 7th Apr. 1977. She has filed this petition under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 to obtain custody of these two minor sons who are at present in the custody of their father viz. the respondent.

(2.) The petition was argued at length by Mr. Trivedi who appeared for the petitioner and by Mr. Parekh who appeared for the Respondent yesterday. In the course of the hearing, on two or three occasions Mr. Parekh, who appeared for the Respondent, made an offer of settlement to the petitioner. After considering these offers the petitioner rejected them. Ultimately after the arguments were over while I was about to dictate my judgment Mr. Trivedi for the petitioner stated that his client desired to accept the offer which had been made earlier by Mr. Parekh. The parties thereafter took some time and reduced the consent terms to writing in Court. Both the petitioner and the Respondent were present in Court throughout. After the consent terms were reduced to writing and before the parties or their advocates put their signatures on the consent terms I asked for the consent terms and went through them in order to satisfy myself that the terms would be for the benefit of the two minors. Thereafter I returned the consent terms to the advocates. After making some minor alterations the consent terms were signed both by the petitioner and the respondent as also by their respective advocates. The signed consent terms were tendered in Court and I have passed an order in terms of the consent terms.

(3.) This happened before 2. 00 p. m. yesterday. After the recess when the afternoon session commenced at 2. 45 p. m. Mr. Parekh appeared before me and stated that his client felt that he had been pressurised into signing these consent terms and that in view of what Jus client felt he would request the court to cancel the consent terms. When Mr. Parekh made this application. Mr. Trivedi as well as the petitioner were also present in Court. Mr. Trivedi, however, said that he could not consent to the consent terms being cancelled. In these circumstances, I have to consider whether it is within my power to set aside the order which I have passed in terms of the consent terms which were thus handed in.