SUKANT BHATTACHARYA Vs. ISHITA BHATTACHARYA (CHAKRABORTY)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard on I.A. No.15621/2017, an application for grant of custody of minor child Sumedha Bhattacharya to the appellant. The appellant made following prayer in this application:

(2.) Appellant is the father of the girl. The marriage was solemnized between the appellant and respondent on 01.06.2004 at Jabalpur. They filed an application for divorce under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act. Earlier, a compromise was entered between the parties and the same was filed before the trial Court. After presentation of the suit under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act, the Court recorded statement and thereafter, granted six months' time to the parties. After lapse of six months' time, the respondent-wife did not appear before the Court. She submitted an application by post and pleaded the fact that she was not willing to get a decree of divorce by mutual consent. The present appellant filed an application under section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure. The trial Court rejected that application and also the suit filed under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act on the ground that the respondent had withdrawn her consent. Hence, the decree of divorce cannot be passed on the basis of mutual consent.

(3.) Against the aforesaid order dated 15.10.2016, the appellant filed this appeal. He also filed an application I.A. No.14757/2016 and prayed for an interim direction that provision of paragraph 6(vi) of compromise filed by the parties before the trial Court be enforced by way of interim relief. This Court vide order dated 13.12.2017 dismissed the application after observing that the compromise which was acted and subsequently the respondent did agree for divorce in terms of the compromise, certain clause of the compromise cannot be ordered to be effected by way of interim relief.