Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Smt Sathya Priya D/O Sri vs Sri S T S Prasadh And Others

High Court Of Karnataka|27 August, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE B. V. NAGARATHNA AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK G. NIJAGANNAVAR M.F.A. NO. 9409 OF 2013 (FC) BETWEEN :
SMT. SATHYA PRIYA D/O. SRI. PANDURANGA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.220, 12TH STREET CHOUDRYNAGAR VALSARAVAKAM CHENNAI – 87 … APPELLANT (BY SRI. G.R. ANANTHARAM, ADVOCATE) AND :
1. SRI. S.T.S. PRASADH S/O. LATE T.S. SRINIVASAN AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS PRESENTLY RESIDING AT NO.792, 1ST FLOOR, 2ND MAIN C BLOCK, AECS LAYOUT KUNDANAHALLI BENGALURU – 37 OLD ADDRESS R/AT NO.21, MAHADEVAPURA CITY MUNICIPAL COUNCIL RAJASHREE LAYOUT MUNNEKOLALA (VILLAGE) VARTHUR HOBLI BENGLAURU 2. SMT. INDIRA SRINIVASAN SINCE DEAD BY HER LRS 2 (a). DR. (MRS.) S. PADMA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS W/O. DR.K. VENUGOPAL & D/O. LATE SMT. INDIRA SRINIVASAN 1-4-15, VISALAKSHIPURAM ROAD RADHA GARDEN MADURAI – 14 TAMIL NADU 2(b). DR. (MRS.) S. VAIJIYANTHI AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS W/O. DR. P.RAGURAM & D/O. LATE SMT. INDIRA SRINIVASAN 4-3-661, SANJEET NAGAR SOMAJI GUDA HYDRABAD – 500 082 A.P.
2(c). SMT. S. LATHA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS W/O. SRI. V. JAISIMHA & D/O. LATE SMT. INDIRA SRINIVASAN R/A NO.342, RAMAKUNDAKALI PALM LAYOUT POST BENGALURU – 560 066 … RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. CHAMPOOKAVYA S., ADVOCATE FOR M/S. SASTRY & CO., ADVOCATES FOR R1;
SRI. SUNIL S. NARAYAN, ADVOCATE FOR R2(C); R2(A) & R2(B) – SERVED) THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(1) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 07/09/2013 PASSED IN O.S.NO.94/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE VI ADDITIONAL PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BANGALORE, DISMISSING THE SUIT.
THIS M.F.A. COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, NAGARATHNA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT This appeal is listed for final hearing.
2. Learned counsel for the respective parties submits that during the pendency of this appeal the matter was referred to Bangalore Mediation Centre and the parties have arrived at a settlement and Memorandum of Settlement under Section 89 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 read with Rules 24 and 25 of the Karnataka Civil Procedure (Mediation) Rules, 2005 has been put up along with the Report of the Director of the Bangalore Mediation Centre.
3. Learned counsel for the respective parties submits that in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties, the matrimonial dispute in HMOP No.406/2019 which was pending in the Court of the learned Sub- ordinate Judge at Poonamallee has been disposed and there has been a decree of divorce granted by mutual consent of the parties.
4. Learned counsel for the respective parties further submits that O.S.No.18/2011 filed by the minor children through their mother and next friend, appellant herein before the Court of the learned Sub-ordinate Judge at Kovilpatti has also been withdrawn. They further submit that in this appeal, a sum of Rs.60,00,000/- has to be paid by the respondent to the appellant and out of which a sum of Rs.40,00,000/- has already been paid to the appellant in the names of children, the receipt of which is acknowledged by the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent submits that two cheques for a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- each in the names of the respective children bearing No.408561 dated 27/08/2019 drawn on Karnataka Bank Limited, Marathahalli, Bengaluru and another Cheque bearing No.408563 dated 27/08/2019 for a likesum and drawn on the same Bank in the names of the respective children are being handed over to the appellant, the receipt of which is acknowledged by the appellant. Therefore, learned counsel submits that this appeal may be disposed of in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties.
5. The parties are present before the Court. They have been identified by the respective counsel.
6. When queried, they submitted that they have arrived at the settlement of their disputes on their own free volition without any coercion or undue influence from any side. They also submit that this appeal could be disposed of in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties before the Mediation Centre.
7. The Memorandum of Settlement is taken on record.
8. It is noted that the same is signed by the respective parties and their advocates. The memorandum of settlement reads as under:-
I. The Appellant has filed the above Appeal against the Judgment and Decree dated 7.9.2013 passed by the Hon’ble VI Additional Family Court at Bengaluru in O.S.No.94/2008. The Appellant has sought, inter alia, the relief of cancellation of the release deed executed in February 2007 relating to the suit schedule house property i.e., site No.21 and Southern portion of site No.20 in Sy.No.11/7, 1st Cross, Rajashree Layout, Munnekolala Village, Marathahalli, Varthur Hobli, Bengaluru-560037.
II. The aforesaid Appeal was referred to Mediation for resolving the dispute between the parties. In the course of Mediation they have resolved their dispute and have agreed to the following terms and conditions:
(1) A marriage between the Appellant and the Respondent was solemnised on 11/11/2002 at KalyaniKalyana Mandapam at Chennai in accordance with Hindu rites and customs. From this wedlock the Appellant and Respondent have two children (twins) aged about 13 years by name Master.PranavSrinivasn and Kumari.HarniSrinivasan, who are presently in the care and custody of the Appellant-mother.
(2) Due to irreconcilable differences between them, the parties have been living separately from each other since December 2007. The Appellant has been and continues to reside, alongwith her two children, at Chennai, while the Respondent has been and continues to reside at Bengaluru.
(3) The Appellant and Respondent have filed the following cases against each other which are pending adjudication:
(a) Petition in RCR HMOP 105/2007 under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act filed by the Appellant herein against the Respondent pending before the Poonamallee Court at Chennai;
(b) Petition in HMOP No.196/2009 under Section 13(1) (1a) and (1b) of the Hindu Marriage Act filed by the Respondent against the Appellant pending before the Poonamallee Court at Chennai.
(c)Review Application/petition No.164/2018 filed by the Respondent herein against the order of the Hon’ble High Court of Tamil Nadu in CRP.No.1154/2014 pending before the Hon’ble High Court of Tamil Nadu.
(d) Suit in O.S.No.18/2011 filed by the Appellant herein on behalf of the two minor children against the Respondent pending before the Sub-Court at Kovilpatti, Tamil Nadu.
(4) The Appellant agrees to withdraw this Appeal filed by her against the judgment and decree in O.S.NO.94/2008 and withdraw the suit in O.S.No.94/2008. She confirms that neither she nor her children have any subsisting right of any nature in immovable property bearing site No.21 and Southern portion of site No.20 in Sy.No.11/7, 1st Cross, Rajashree Layout, Munnekolala Village, Marathahalli, Varthur Hobli, Bengaluru- 560037 and in any other immovable property being the ancestral and/or self- acquired property of the Respondent, and that all rights therein shallbe fully relinquished in favour of the Respondent hereinonly after the Respondent pays in full the amount specified hereinafter, for the benefit of his minor children and no further or formal documentation shall be required. The Appellant being the mother and natural guardian of both the minor children, agrees that relinquishment of the minor children’s rights in any ancestral property of the Respondent, is in the best interest of the minors, considering the uncertainty of and time consumed in pending litigation, and as the Respondent has agreed to pay the aforesaid amount of Rs.60,00,000/- (Rupees Sixty Lakhs only) for the benefit of both minor children.
(5) The Appellant and the Respondent have mutually agreed to resolve all the aforesaid disputes and put a permanent end to all disputes and have agreed that the marriage which was solmenised between them on 11/11/2002 at KalyaniKalyanaMandapam at Chennai be dissolved by a decree of divorce.
(6) The Respondent has agreed to pay a sum of Rs.60,00,000/- (Rupees Sixty Lakhs only) to the Appellant in full and final settlement of all claims of maintenance, past, present or future, for the Appellant and two children and no claims of any nature shall survive hereafter.
(7) As the appellant, she has no claims of maintenance, alimony or any similar or other claims of any nature against the Respondent and/or any of his assets, either present or that may be acquired by him in future and all claims of any nature shall stand fully and finally settled.
(8) The Respondent agrees to pay the aforesaid agreed sum of Rs.60,00,000/- (Rupees Sixty Lakhs only) in the following manner:
The Respondent agrees to pay a sum of Rs.20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lakhs only) to the Appellant by a demand draft upon and simultaneously with the Appellant withdrawing the Partition suit in O.S.No.18/2011 pending on the file of Sub Court at Kovilpatti by filing an appropriate Memo before such Court within 05 working days together with a copy of this settlement failing which the appellant will refund all amounts paid till the date of this settlement.
a. As a part of this First Tranche payment Respondent will ensure that the cheques/DD issued by Reliance Mutual Fund in name of Pranaav Srinivasan [Approximately 2.4 Lacs] and Harini Srinivasan [Approximately 4.9 lacs] are handed over to the Appellant. These approximate values are based on NAV as on 5th April 2019. Respondent will make good the difference between the value of the said cheques and Rs.20,00,000 (Twenty lakhs only).
b. The Respondent agrees to pay a sum of Rs.20,00,000/-(Rupees twenty Lakhs only) in demand draft on or before 30th April 2019 to the Appellant simultaneously with this settlement being produced before the Poonamallee Court at Chennai on 09.04.2018 and the Hon’ble Court passing an order in HMOP No.196/2009 dissolving the marriage solemnized between the Appellant and Respondent and the Appellant withdrawing the case in RCR HMOP 105/2007 pending on the file of the Family Court at Poonamalee at Chennai within 05 working days failing which will refund all the amounts paid till date of this settlement.
c. The Respondent agrees to pay to the Appellant Rs.20,00,000/-(Rupees Twenty Lakhs only) by demand draft on or before 10th June 2019, simultaneously with and upon the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka accepting this settlement in M.F.A.No.9409/2013 and disposing of the Appeal. This will be by filing an appropriate Memo before such Court together with a coy of this settlement, within 05 working days failing which the appellant will refund all amounts paid until till the date of this settlement.
d. As a part of this third tranche, the Respondent also holds an Insurance Policy from HDFC Life with a surrender value of the same is Rs.1,25,000/- (Rupees One Lakh twenty five Thousand Only) The respondent will on a date to be intimated to the appellant handover the policy surrender letter to HDFC Life in the presence of the appellant. The funds from this payout will be a part of the third and final settlement.
(9)a. The permanent custody of both their children (twins) Master. Pranav Srinivasan and Kum. Harini Srinivasan will remain with the Appellant herein (mother) and the Appellant (mother) shall be responsible for the care, welfare, upbringing of both children.
b. In addition to the visitation rights already available to the respondent in RCR HMOP 105/2017 pending before the Poonamallee Court, Chennai any additional request to meet and be with the children will be in accordance with the children’s wishes.
Both the parties agree that in view of this compromise settlement the withdrawal/closure of all cases as hereinbefore specified on or before 30.07.2019.
(10) Both parties agree that the entire aforesaid agreed sum of Rs.60,00,000/- (Rupees Sixty Lakhs only) paid and provided in the manner hereinbefore specified shall be deposited by the Appellant in a fixed deposit in any nationalized bank/Mutual Fund equally in the names of each of the children until the children attain 18 years of age. Upon their attaining the age of 18 years, all amounts payable on account of such deposits shall be paid to both the children in equal shares. Until then the Appellant herein shall be entitled to use/utilize/withdraw the interest accruing from both the fixed deposits solely for the living, educational, medical and other related expenses of the children and for the benefit of the children. The Appellant shall not be entitled to create any encumbrance/liability against or in relation to either or both the deposits.
(11) The Appellant and Respondent confirm that they have no claims of any nature in relation to or in respect of any or all of their belongings, jewellery, gold and silver articles and also other valuables against each other and all claims relating thereto have been satisfactorily and finally resolved.
(12) In view of the aforesaid settlement reached between the Appellant and the Respondent, both the parties have agreed not to make any claim/s hereafter against each other in respect of permanent alimony or any other claim whatsoever, either past, present and future and also in respect of movable and immovable properties that they may acquire in their names in future.
(13) The Appellant and the Respondent agree to ensure that either they or their family members will not interfere in each other’s personal, property ancestral, self- acquired and professional life in future and will endeavor to maintain cordiality in relationships.
(14) In the event Appellant predeceases the Respondent, untoward/unfortunate event/permanent disability leading to loss of judgment skills to the Appellant the custody of both the children shall vest with in and with the Respondent only with the consent of the children. The paramount welfare of the children shall be taken care by the Appellant with the consent of the children only.
The Settlement herein arrived at between the parties being subject to the fulfillment of his obligations by the Respondent making timely payments as specified herein before, in the event of the Respondent committing default in payment of any one of the installment herein before mentioned, this Settlement shall stand rescinded and be of no avail and the Appellant shall be entitled to have the cases that are filed by her before various Courts referred to herein supra revived and the Appellant shall be entitled to proceed against the Respondent.
III. In view of the aforesaid agreement entered into between the parties, the parties pray that the above case be disposed off in terms of the aforesaid agreement.
IV. Parties will appear on the date this case is posted before the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka, for passing appropriate orders in terms of the agreement. ”
9. The parties submit that they have no further claims against each other and they abide by the terms of the settlement.
10. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that this appeal could be disposed of and that in the event the cheques are not realized, liberty may be reserved to the appellant to re-open this appeal.
11. Learned counsel for the respondents on behalf of the respondents assures that such an occasion would not arise.
12. We have perused the terms of the settlement.
In the terms of the settlement, it is noted that the HMOP No.406/2019 is disposed and a decree of divorce by mutual consent has been granted by the learned Sub-ordinate Judge, Poonamallee and O.S.No.18/2011 filed by the minor children through their mother and next friend before the learned Sub-ordinate Judge at Kovilpatti has been dismissed as withdrawn by order passed on 06.06.2019. The balance amount of Rs.20,00,000/- which has to be paid by the respondent has also been paid through the aforesaid two cheques, subject to realization.
13. On perusal of the terms of the settlement, we find that they are lawful and that there is no legal impediment to accept the same. In the circumstances, we accept the settlement arrived at between the parties and dispose of this appeal in terms of the settlement and in substitution of the impugned judgment and decree of the Trial Court.
Registry to draw up a decree accordingly.
It is needless to observe that in the event the cheques are not realized, liberty is reserved to the appellant to re-open this appeal.
Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE KG
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Smt Sathya Priya D/O Sri vs Sri S T S Prasadh And Others

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
27 August, 2019
Judges
  • B V Nagarathna
  • Ashok G Nijagannavar