SARFAESI Act | Sale Certificate Cannot Be Issued In Favour Of A Third-Party Nominee Who Was Not The Auction Bidder: Supreme Court SARFAESI Act | Auction Sale Conducted In Violation Of Mandatory Rules And Subsisting Restraint Order Is Vitiated In Law: Supreme Court Recovery Of Alleged Overpayment From A Separate, Unrelated Contract Without Notice Violates Principles Of Natural Justice: Supreme Court IBC | Adjudicating Authority Has Power To Recall CIRP Admission Order If It Was Obtained Through Fraud Or Collusion: Supreme Court Section 138 NI Act | Presumption Of Service Is Attracted Once Notice Is Dispatched To Correct Address Of Drawer: Supreme Court Operation Of Hookah Bars In Restaurants Constitutes Violation Of Rule 4(3) Of COTPA Rules: Allahabad High Court High Court Cannot Recall Order Passed On Merits Even If Passed Ex-Parte: Bombay High Court Administrative Authorities Cannot Pass Orders Having Civil Consequences Without Meaningful Consideration Of The Affected Employee’s Response: Allahabad High Court Discharge Application Cannot Be Converted Into A 'Mini-Trial' To Assess Evidentiary Sufficiency: Andhra Pradesh High Court Order VII Rule 11 CPC | Plaint Must Be Rejected If Allegations Are Falsified By Documents Annexed To Plaint Or Based On Non-Existent Law: Bombay High Court Police Cannot Interfere In Pending Civil Disputes Or Act As Arbitrators In Private Property Conflicts: Andhra Pradesh High Court Contract For Personal Services Between Doctor And Hospital Is Determinable And Not Specifically Enforceable: Calcutta High Court Allegations Of Sexual Offences Cannot Be Quashed Based On Contradictory Evidence Requiring Mini-Trial: Delhi High Court PMLA Adjudication | Failure To Expressly Discuss Every Submission In Written Synopsis Does Not Vitiate Order Under Principles Of Natural Justice: Karnataka High Court Prolonged Separation Of Sixteen Years Constitutes Cruelty Under Special Marriage Act: Kerala High Court Grants Divorce Order XII Rule 6 CPC | Decree Of Possession Can Be Granted On Admissions Even If Relationship Of Landlord-Tenant Is Disputed: Delhi High Court Non-Framing Of Issues Under Order XIV CPC Does Not Vitiate Trial Unless Prejudice Is Proved: Madras High Court Order 47 Rule 1 CPC | Review Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Cure Failure To Produce Evidence That Was Within Knowledge Of Applicant: Madhya Pradesh High Court Codicil To A Will Must Be Proved Like A Will; Propounder Must Remove All Suspicious Circumstances: Punjab & Haryana High Court Mere Lodging Of Section 498-A IPC Case Not Cruelty: Telangana High Court Sets Aside Divorce Decree Order XVII Rule 3 CPC | Power To Dismiss Suit For Default Of Evidence Is Drastic And Must Be Exercised Sparingly: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Supreme Court Grants Divorce by Mutual Consent, Quashes All Pending Cases in Matrimonial Dispute

26 September 2024 9:19 PM

By: Deepak Kumar


On September 10, 2024, the Supreme Court of India, in Neha Goel v. Ashish Tayal, Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 1455 of 2023, granted divorce by mutual consent under Article 142 of the Constitution and quashed all pending legal proceedings between the parties. The matter, which initially arose from a transfer petition seeking the relocation of a matrimonial case from Serampore, West Bengal to Hisar, Haryana, was amicably resolved through mediation. The parties reached a settlement agreement that addressed all disputes, including custody of their minor child and the payment of alimony.

The petitioner, Neha Goel, sought the transfer of Mat Suit No. 257 of 2023, a petition for restitution of conjugal rights filed by her husband, Ashish Tayal, under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, from the Serampore Court in West Bengal to Hisar, Haryana, where she resides. Various other cases, including those under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, and Section 125 CrPC, were also pending between the parties in different jurisdictions.

The Supreme Court referred the matter to the Supreme Court Mediation Centre, where the parties reached a settlement agreement dated December 4, 2023, followed by a subsequent mediation agreement on August 22, 2024, resolving all issues, including the custody of their minor child and financial arrangements.

The Supreme Court noted that both parties had agreed to divorce by mutual consent and had jointly applied for the dissolution of their marriage. Exercising its extraordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Court granted the divorce, thereby dissolving the marriage.

"As consented by the parties, we grant a decree of divorce by mutual consent in exercise of our powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India. In consequence, the marriage between petitioner (Neha Goel) and respondent (Ashish Tayal) shall stand dissolved." [Para 7(i)]

The settlement agreement included provisions for the custody of the parties' 22-month-old minor child, with custody awarded to the mother (petitioner) and visitation rights granted to the father (respondent). The father would have monthly virtual meetings and quarterly physical visitation supervised by the mother.

Additionally, the petitioner received a total sum of ₹28 lakhs from the respondent as full and final settlement for all alimony and maintenance claims.

"The petitioner has received a sum of ₹28,00,000/­ (Rupees Twenty­Eight Lakhs only) towards full and final permanent alimony, including past, present, and future maintenance, and she would not raise any further claim in the future in the property of the husband or his family." [Para 7(ii)]

Complaint Case No. 66 of 2023 under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act before the Judicial Magistrate, Hisar.

MNT No. 95 of 2023 under Section 125 CrPC before the Principal District Judge, Family Court, Hisar.

Mat Suit No. 257 of 2023 under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Additional District Judge, Serampore, Hooghly.

DMC No. 509 of 2023 under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Family Court, Hisar.

FIR No. CHI 1884/2023 under Sections 323, 406, 498A, and 506 IPC at Women Police Station, Hisar.

The Court accepted the settlement terms and quashed these cases:

"The cases mentioned in Clause 2 of the settlement agreement... shall be treated as disposed of and shall be consigned to the record." [Para 7(iv)]

Initially, the settlement denied the father visitation rights, but during subsequent mediation, both parties agreed to amend this clause. The new agreement granted the father virtual visitation once a month and quarterly physical meetings with the child, supervised by the mother. The Court found this arrangement to be in the best interests of the child.

"As per the said report, the parties have also agreed to the additional terms and are ready to ignore clause (3) of the previous settlement. The subsequent settlement allows visitation rights to the father." [Para 4]

Divorce by Mutual Consent: The Court granted divorce by mutual consent under Article 142 and dissolved the marriage.

Full and Final Settlement: The petitioner acknowledged receiving ₹28 lakhs as full and final settlement for alimony and maintenance. The Court confirmed that no further claims would be raised by either party in the future regarding property or maintenance.

Quashing of Cases: All pending cases, including those under the Domestic Violence Act, Section 125 CrPC, and other related proceedings, were quashed.

Visitation Rights: The father was granted monthly virtual visitation and quarterly physical meetings with the minor child, as agreed in the subsequent mediation.

Final Settlement Agreement: The Court incorporated the settlement agreements dated December 4, 2023, and August 22, 2024, into its order, making them part of the official record.

"The Settlement Agreements dated 04.12.2023 and 22.08.2024 are on record and be treated as part of this order." [Para 8]

The Supreme Court’s decision to grant divorce by mutual consent and quash all ongoing legal proceedings underscores the importance of amicable resolution in matrimonial disputes. The Court’s intervention through mediation allowed the parties to reach a comprehensive settlement, ensuring a peaceful separation and addressing key issues like custody, visitation rights, and financial arrangements.

Date of Decision: September 10, 2024

Neha Goel v. Ashish Tayal

Latest Legal News