Sheela Ravindra Khadse vs Dr. Ravindra Shankarrao Khadse
2024 Latest Caselaw 22844 Bom

Bombay High Court

Sheela Ravindra Khadse vs Dr. Ravindra Shankarrao Khadse on 6 August, 2024

Author: Mangesh S. Patil

Bench: Mangesh S. Patil

2024:BHC-AUG:17228-DB

                                              1

                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                          907 FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO. 32 OF 2020

                                  SHEELA RAVINDRA KHADSE
                                            VERSUS
                            DR. RAVINDRA SHANKARRAO KHADSE
                                               ...
                           Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Gawali Amol K.
                        Advocate for Respondent : Mrs. Manjusha Narwade
                                               ...

                                      CORAM        : MANGESH S. PATIL &
                                                     SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.

                                      DATE         : 06 AUGUST 2024

              PER COURT :

                           Heard both the sides.

2. This is an appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu

Marriage Act, whereby, the wife is taking exception to the

judgment and order refusing to grant divorce on the ground of

cruelty and desertion as contemplated under Section 31 (a) (1) (b)

of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

3. During pendency of the appeal, the couple has entered

into a settlement. The terms of compromise have also been placed

on record after due verification before the Registrar (Judicial).

They, inter alia, have agreed to seek divorce by mutual consent in

this very appeal. The minutes were also recorded on 01 November

2023.

4. The second motion is now being moved by both the

sides seeking a final order in terms of the compromise 'X'.

5. There is no dispute about the fact that the couple got

married on 14 May 2006 and have been separate since before

filing of the divorce petition in the year 2017. A period of more

than six months has already lapsed, since the terms of compromise

have been settled and filed. Motion deserves to be accepted.

6. However, taking into account the fact that the

compromise deed contains, inter alia, a stipulation in clause no.

(IV) stating that the appellant wife is giving no right of

maintenance on behalf of Aishwarya and Deepika, the two minor

daughters as their guardian, in our considered view, the stipulation

is against the interest of the minor daughters. The condition is

unconscionable and cannot be allowed to be a part of settlement.

There is nothing in the compromise deed to secure their interest.

7. Learned Advocates of both the sides in presence of the

appellant and the respondent unanimously submit this term /

clause (IV) shall not be a part of the settlement.

8. In view of above, by treading the present proceedings

as a petition under Section 13 B of the Hindu Marriage Act and

since the cooling off period is over, we declare the marriage

between the two stands dissolved with immediate effect. The

compromise (exhibit 'X') shall from part of the decree, excluding

clause (IV).

[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J. ] [ MANGESH S. PATIL, J. ]

Thakur-Chauhan/-