Delhi High Court
Shona Taneja @ Sonali Yograj ... vs Sachin Taneja on 8 December, 2015
25 & 26
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CONT.CAS(C) 144/2013 & CM APPL. 5280/2014
SHONA TANEJA @ SONALI YOGRAJ TANEJA ..... Petitioner
Through: Ms. Geeta Luthra, Senior Advocate with
Ms. Shreya Singh, Advocate
versus
SACHIN TANEJA ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. P. Banerjee, Advocate with
respondent in person.
And
+ CONT.CAS(C) 599/2013
SACHIN TANEJA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. P. Banerjee, Advocate with
petitioner in person.
versus
SHONA (SONALI) TANEJA
@ SONALI YOGRAJ TENEJA ..... Respondent
Through: Ms. Geeta Luthra, Senior Advocate with
Ms. Shreya Singh, Advocate
% Date of Decision : 08th December, 2015
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
CONT.CAS(C) 144/2013, 599/2013 Page 1 of 6
JUDGMENT
MANMOHAN, J: (Oral)
1. Ms. Geeta Luthra, learned senior counsel for Ms. Shona Taneja states
that more than Rs.84 lacs are due and payable by Mr. Sachin Taneja towards
the maintenance of their children in accordance with the mutual consent
divorce decree and judgment dated 11th May, 2012.
2. Ms. Luthra further states that despite this Court's order dated 08th
August, 2013, Mr. Sachin Taneja has not deposited any amount with the
Registry of this Court. She states that even under the subsequent order dated
16th April, 2014, Mr. Sachin Taneja has not paid the maintenance amount of
Rs.1 lac per month.
3. Learned counsel for Mr. Sachin Taneja states that his client is not
supposed to subsidize the second marriage of Ms. Shona Taneja. He further
states that as Ms. Shona Taneja has remarried, Mr. Sachin Taneja is not
bound to pay any maintenance amount. He also states that as the visitation
rights conferred upon him have been violated by Ms. Shona Taneja, he is not
supposed to comply with the terms of the mutual consent decree for divorce.
Lastly, learned counsel for Mr. Sachin Taneja states that his client does not
have the financial resources to pay the outstanding dues. He states that the
bonafides of Mr. Sachin Taneja would be apparent from the fact that till date
he has paid Rs.35 lacs to Ms. Shona Taneja.
4. Upon a perusal of the petition for dissolution of marriage by mutual
consent, it is apparent that Mr. Sachin Taneja had agreed to pay not only the
school fees of his two children, but also the monthly maintenance amount of
Rs.1 lac per month of his two children irrespective of the fact whether
Ms. Shona Taneja remarried. The relevant extract of the petition for
dissolution of marriage by decree of divorce by mutual consent duly signed
by both the parties is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"B. Household expenses
a) Petitioner No.1 will bear a fixed sum of expenses of
Rs.100,000 a month towards the running of the house hold. This
will include all staff salaries, expenses on food and entertainment,
security, car maintenance and petrol. This will be subject to an
inflationary increase of 10% every two years.
b) Petitioner No.1 will further provide a new Innova or
equivalent car which will be changed every 5 years.
c) Petitioner No.1 is agreeable that should he be in a better
financial position or/and be able to put his current property or rent
the will also pay at least 50% of the rent paid by the Petitioner No.2
for her residential accommodation.
C. General
a) The support for expenses enumerated above will commence
with retrospective from 1st Jan. 2011.
b) Petitioner No.1 will ensure that all the expenses and
reimbursements are paid to Petitioner No.2 on a regular basis on a
fixed timetable and that there will never be any need for Petitioner
No.2 to chase any of these payments since this will only lead to
spoiling the relationship.
c) The arrangement will continue irrespective of whether
Petitioners decide to remarry again.
(emphasis supplied)
5. Since admittedly, there was breach of payment of maintenance
amount, this Court on 08th August, 2013 recorded Mr. Sachin Taneja's
undertaking/agreement to pay the outstanding amount within a period of five
months. The order dated 08th August, 2013 is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"In pursuance to the last order, Mr. Abhey Yograj and Mr. Nikhil
Nath are personally present.
It is agreed between the parties that Rs. 5,00,000/- shall be
paid by Mr. Sachin Taneja to Mrs. Sonali Yograj Nath within a period
of two weeks. It is further agreed that a further amount of Rs.
20,00,000/- shall be deposited in this Court by Mr. Sachin Taneja
within a period of five months from today.
List on 25th November, 2013.
In the meantime, Mr. Sachin Taneja shall be entitled to meet
his children once a fortnight at Delhi Golf Club."
(emphasis supplied)
6. As once again there was a default, this Court directed Mr. Sachin
Taneja to place on record his bank passbook and his financial statements.
Mr. Sachin Taneja was also directed to place on record his offer to assign the
LIC Policy and/or immovable property in favour of his minor children.
Keeping in view the terms of the mutual consent decree, Mr. Sachin Taneja
was once against directed to pay Rs.1 lac per month Ms. Shona Taneja. The
order dated 16th April, 2014 is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"Ms. Nandita Rao, learned counsel is directed to place on
record Mr.Sachin Taneja's bank pass book and his financial
statements. She is also directed to place on record his offer to assign
the LIC policy and/or immovable properties in favour of his minor
children.
In addition to the school fee, Mr. Sachin Taneja is also directed
to pay Rs.1,00,000/- per month from 01st May, 2014 to Ms. Shona
Taneja.
Mr. Sachin Taneja is also directed to comply with the
directions passed by this Court.
This Court may mention that any default in making the monthly
instalments would be seriously viewed by it.
Reply affidavit, if any, be filed before the next date of hearing.
List the matters on 04th August, 2014."
(emphasis supplied)
7. Even the aforesaid order has not been complied with. Mr. Sachin
Taneja has also not placed on record his passbook and his financial
statements. No offer to assign the LIC Policy and/or immovable property
has also been placed on record.
8. It seems to this Court that the latitude given to Mr. Sachin Taneja to
pay has been mis-construed by him as a sign of 'weakness' on the part of the
Court.
9. Keeping in view the aforesaid breach of the mutual consent divorce
decree and judgment dated 11th May, 2012, this Court was inclined to punish
Mr. Sachin Taneja forthwith. However, as Mr. Sachin Taneja has taken the
plea that he is not a wilful defaulter inasmuch as he does not have funds to
make payment in accordance with mutual consent divorce decree, this Court
directs the Chief Commissioner, Income Tax Department to direct Mr.
Sachin Taneja's Assessing Officer to scrutinise his accounts after seeking
details of his bank accounts, credit cards, passbook and list of assets.
10. If the Chief Commissioner and/or the Assessing Officer is of the view
that any income has escaped assessment, they will take action in accordance
with law.
11. This Court may mention that the aforesaid direction has been passed
as Mr. Sachin Taneja's life style seems to be good and he has failed to place
on record his passbook and financial statements despite having been directed
to do so way back on 16th April, 2014.
12. Mr. Sachin Taneja is directed to give details of his bank accounts,
credit cards, passbook and list of assets owned by him to the Chief
Commissioner, Income Tax, within a period of three weeks.
13. The Assessing Officer through the Chief Commissioner of Income
Tax shall file his report before this Court within a period of eight weeks.
List on 22nd February, 2016.
Order dasti.
MANMOHAN, J
DECEMBER 08, 2015
js
