Supreme Court Grants Divorce by Mutual Consent Following Settlement. Settlement Reached with Payment of Rs. 16 Lakhs Leading to Quashing of Criminal Cases and Resolution of All Disputes.

  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involved a civil appeal concerning a divorce between the parties, Devendra Kumar Sharma and Bhavna Sharma. During the proceedings, the parties reached an amicable settlement where the appellant agreed to pay Rs. 16 lakhs to the respondent, which was to be considered as full and final settlement of all claims. The respondent's counsel confirmed that upon receiving this amount, the respondent would not pursue the criminal case against the appellant. Consequently, the court quashed two criminal cases filed by the respondent, one under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act and another in the Assistant Collector & Magistrate's court. The parties requested a decree of divorce by mutual consent, which the court granted, stating that all disputes were resolved and no further actions would be taken against each other. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.

Headnote

A) Family Law - Divorce by Mutual Consent - Grant of Decree - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - The parties reached an amicable settlement, with the appellant paying Rs. 16 lakhs to the respondent, leading to the resolution of all disputes. The court deemed it appropriate to grant a decree of divorce by mutual consent, quashing the criminal cases filed by the respondent against the appellant. Held that all disputes were resolved and no further action would be taken by either party (Paras 3-7).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the court should grant a decree of divorce by mutual consent following a settlement between the parties.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court granted a decree of divorce by mutual consent, quashing the criminal cases filed by the respondent against the appellant, and disposed of the appeal.

Law Points

  • Divorce by mutual consent
  • Settlement of claims
  • Quashing of criminal cases
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2011 LawText (SC) (11) 74

Civil Appeal No. 8535 of 2011

2011-10-10

Dalveer Bhandari, Deepak Verma

Sushil Kumar Jain

Devendra Kumar Sharma

Bhavna Sharma

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Civil appeal concerning divorce and criminal cases.

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought a decree of divorce by mutual consent.

Filing Reason

The parties had disputes leading to litigation and criminal cases.

Issues

Whether the court should grant a decree of divorce by mutual consent following a settlement.

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant agreed to pay Rs. 16 lakhs to the respondent, leading to the resolution of disputes. The respondent agreed not to pursue the criminal cases upon receiving the settlement amount.

Ratio Decidendi

The court emphasized the importance of amicable settlements in family disputes and the resolution of all claims through mutual consent.

Judgment Excerpts

We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. This amount is paid in full and final settlement of the entire claim of the respondent Bhavna Sharma and her children. Consequently, we quash the following criminal cases filed by respondent Bhavna Sharma.

Procedural History

The appeal arose from SLP(C) No.18439/2007 and was heard in the Supreme Court.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908:
  • Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal in Property Dispute Case — No Interference with High Court's Well-Reasoned Order. Citing the plaintiff's failure to specify the cause of action and the defendants' claim of estoppel under Section 138 of the J & K Tran...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case — No Error Found in Lower Courts' Findings. The court affirmed the conviction under Section 302 IPC, finding that the solitary blow inflicted by the appellant demonstrated intention to kill and knowle...