NARINDER PAL SINGH Vs. NEETU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE marriage between the petitioners was solemnized according to Sikh Rites and Ceremonies at Jalandhar on 21.11.2007. After marriage they cohabited as husband and wife. They had no child from their marriage. During marriage matrimonial dispute arose between the petitioners and Narinder Pal Singh (petitioner No. 1) on 18.05.2009 filed a petition against his wife Neetu (petitioner No. 2) seeking dissolution of the marriage between the parties on the ground of cruelty. The learned Additional District Judge, Jalandhar after considering the evidence and material on record allowed the petition for divorce filed by Narinder Pal Singh (petitioner No. 1) vide judgment and decree dated 27.05.2011 and dissolved the marriage between the parties by a decree of divorce. Neetu (petitioner No. 2) aggrieved against the said judgment and decree filed the present appeal (FAO No. M -186 of 2011). During the pendency of the appeal, the parties entered into a settlement and decided to part ways amicably.

(2.) CM No. 5981 -CII of 2013 was initially filed by the appellant seeking withdrawal of the appeal. However, deliberations were carried out and the parties agreed to file a joint petition for divorce in terms of Section 13 -B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 ('Act' - for short) for dissolving their marriage by a decree of divorce by mutual consent. Accordingly a joint petition was filed in Court on 18.03.2013 which was taken on record and was ordered to be numbered by the Registry. The joint petition for divorce has been numbered as CM No. 8274 -CII of 2013. It was ordered that the said joint petition that had been filed be treated as a petition filed on 18.03.2013, that is, the date it was filed. This was so ordered as the parties had been living together till April, 2009 and the petition for divorce was initially filed by Narinder Pal Singh (petitioner No. 1) on 18.05.2009. Therefore, in case the petition was amended and taken into account from the date of institution of the original petition, the statutory period of one year for the parties to the petition to be living separately before filing the joint petition for divorce would not have lapsed. The parties have been living separately from April 2009 and till the filing of the initial petition on 18.05.2009, a period of one year had not lapsed, which is one of the requirements for the filing of a joint petition for divorce by mutual consent. On the statements of the learned counsel for the parties, the conversion of the original petition that was filed to that of a petition under Section 13 -B of the Act was treated to be instituted on the date it was filed in this Court i.e. on 18.03.2013. In fact the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sampath Kumar v. Ayyakannu and another, : AIR 2002 SC 3369, has observed as follows: -

(3.) THE statements of the parties at the first motion were recorded on 18.03.2013. Both the parties inter alia stated that they want divorce and they had entered into a compromise. The original compromise Ex. C1 was tendered in evidence by both the parties. Each page of the compromise was signed by them. It was inter alia agreed in terms of the compromise that there was no hope of reconciliation in the near future and taking into consideration the young age of both the parties and hope of fresh resettlement, respectable and common relatives from both the parties had intervened and prevailed upon them to put to an end to the ongoing litigation and live peacefully without intervention. Narinder Pal Singh (petitioner No. 1) had undertaken to pay to Neetu (petitioner No. 2) and minor son of the parties namely Samrat a lumpsum amount of Rs. 5 lacs each for their past, present and future maintenance. Neetu (petitioner No. 2) had undertaken to withdraw her petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and also to withdraw her complaint under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act and also CMM No. 97 of 2011 for grant of maintenance pendente lite. Both the parties had further agreed to receive their belongings from each other and on receipt of their belongings and on receipt of the lumpsum maintenance as detailed above, none of the parties it was agreed shall file any civil, criminal or any other proceedings qua their belongings, maintenance and any other right or claim qua their marriage in any manner in any Court in future against each other; besides, they would not interfere in the personal life of each other and both the parties would be at liberty to live their personal life in any manner they like.