LIVE Online Course on NDPS by Riva Pocha and Adv. Taraq Sayed. Starting from 24th May. Register Now!!
The Indian Constitution Courses

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

NM (j)     19 May 2018

Despite settlement agreement, courts cannot compel party to

Despite Settlement Agreement, Courts Cannot Compel Party To Consent To Mutual Divorce : Delhi HC... Rajat_Gupta_vs_Rupali_Gupta_on_15_May,_2018 Can anyone elaborate?


Learning

 7 Replies

Kumar Doab (FIN)     19 May 2018

1st go thru;

Delhi High Court

Rajat Gupta vs Rupali Gupta on 9 January, 2017

 

25. This Court is of the opinion that the legislative intent is not that a marriage should be dissolved only on the basis of consent given in a prior settlement agreement bearing the imprimatur of a Court or at the stage of Section 13B(1) petition just because it was coupled with consideration.

26. Undoubtedly, as held in in Avneesh Sood (supra) and Shikha Bhatia (supra), no litigant can be allowed to wriggle out of a solemn undertaken given to a Court and orders of the Courts have to be obeyed until and unless they are set aside in appeal/revision, yet this Court is of the view that the statutory option to reflect and retract cannot be taken away just because one of the parties has given an undertaking or has accepted either some money or benefit at the 13B(1) stage. However, one cannot retain a benefit received at the 13B(1) stage, if he/she is not willing to go ahead with the second motion. A party who has developed second thoughts has to return the benefit received either under the settlement agreement or at 13B(1) stage. But, in the opinion of this Court, it would not be proper to force the party who has developed second thoughts in accordance with the option given by the statute, to go ahead with the divorce at the pain of contempt. Consequently, this Court has grave doubts as to the applicability of the judgment in Afcons Infrastructure Ltd. & Anr. (supra) to the present batch of matters.

27. Also, if the statutory requirement is of continuous consent till the second motion is allowed, then this Court has grave doubt as to whether the action of a party exercising its statutory right to rethink/renege can be termed as mocking at the Court or encouraging dishonesty or indulging in fraud/ misrepresentation as held in Avneesh Sood (supra) and Shikha Bhatia (supra).

 

Then 30…………

And finally

Accordingly, list the matters before Division Bench on 07 th February, 2017 subject to orders of Hon'ble the Chief Justice.

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/58433688/

Kumar Doab (FIN)     19 May 2018

 

Then to get answers to questions at 30….above..

Contempt of court, willful backtracking from undertaking given to court  

Delhi High Court

Rajat Gupta vs Rupali Gupta on 15 May, 2018

 

Read

63…. For guidelines and

 

63(13) ….appropriate action as permissible in law to enforce compliance by the defaulting party by exercising contempt jurisdiction as contemplated under Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971. This will however exclude any coercive orders compelling the defaulting party to give its consent for grant of a decree of divorce by mutual consent, notwithstanding any settlement/undertaking given by the parties before any fora.

 

Then read 66,67

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/193567322/

In nutshell contempt proceedings can be exercised……as in detailed judgment.

 

  

 

Kumar Doab (FIN)     19 May 2018

There are judgments as far as withdrawal of consent in MCD is concenred..

YOu may go thru many similar threads, articles, files e.g; article

Withdrawal of consent for divorce

under my profile..


(Guest)

Women can play all types of games before signing on the dotted line.  This is very very old fact.  Nothing new in this.  Only respite left for man is either not to marry Indian woman or stay bachelors.

b.goheel   24 May 2018

Originally posted by : Kumar Doab
 

Then to get answers to questions at 30….above..

Contempt of court, willful backtracking from undertaking given to court  

Delhi High Court

Rajat Gupta vs Rupali Gupta on 15 May, 2018

 

Read

63…. For guidelines and

 

63(13) ….appropriate action as permissible in law to enforce compliance by the defaulting party by exercising contempt jurisdiction as contemplated under Section 2(b) of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971. This will however exclude any coercive orders compelling the defaulting party to give its consent for grant of a decree of divorce by mutual consent, notwithstanding any settlement/undertaking given by the parties before any fora.

 

Then read 66,67

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/193567322/

In nutshell contempt proceedings can be exercised……as in detailed judgment.

 

  

 


nice said about pros and cons of withdrawl of mcd

NM (j)     24 May 2018

Section 2(b) in the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (b) �civil contempt� means wilful disobedience to any judgment, decree, direction, order, writ or other process of a court or wilful breach of an undertaking given to a court;

Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  


Related Threads


Loading

Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query