Registration Act | Contested Decree Declaring Pre-Existing Rights By Adverse Possession Does Not Require Compulsory Registration Or Stamp Duty: Madhya Pradesh High Court Section 498A IPC | Vague Allegations Without Specific Overt Acts Against Relatives Cannot Sustain Prosecution: Kerala High Court Motor Accident Claims | Tribunal Must Adopt Standardised Notional Income Charts For Determining Loss Of Future Earnings: Karnataka High Court Suit On Dishonoured Cheque Is Based On Statutory Liability Under Negotiable Instruments Act And Not On Underlying Original Transaction: Kerala High Court State Cannot Re-Litigate Grounds Rejected In Earlier Final Judgment To Deny Employment: Allahabad High Court Orders Appointment of Librarians JJ Act | JJBs Cannot Simply 'Return' Child In Conflict With Law To Police Without Passing Placement Orders If Bail Not Granted: Andhra Pradesh High Court PMLA | Official Banking Transactions In Usual Course Of Business Cannot Be Construed As Proceeds Of Crime: Bombay High Court Section 41A CrPC | Serving Notice After Arrest Is Illegal, Police Cannot Simply Arrest To Ask Questions: Bombay High Court Fit-Out Possession Without Completion Certificate Is Not Valid Possession; Builder Cannot Charge Delayed Interest Or GST When Default Is On Its Part: Chandigarh State Commission Appellate Court Must Not Disturb Acquittal Unless Trial Court’s View Is Perverse Or Manifestly Illegal: Gujarat High Court Order 12 Rule 6 CPC | Landlord Divesting Ownership Via Pre-Suit Sale Deed Loses Locus Standi Under Section 109 TP Act; Summary Eviction Decree Impermissible: Delhi High Court Section 151 CPC Cannot Be Invoked For Restoration Of Possession When Statutory Remedy Under Section 144 Exists: Calcutta High Court 'Mere Assertion Of Higher Rent By Landlord Cannot Oust DRC Act': Delhi High Court Sets Aside Eviction Decree, Remands Matter Back Arbitration Clause In Agreement No Safe Harbour For Criminal Breach Of Trust; Pre-Arrest Bail In Economic Offences An Exception: Allahabad High Court Order 7 Rule 10 CPC | Pecuniary Jurisdiction Cannot Be Determined Solely On Plaintiff's Oral Admission In Cross-Examination: Madras High Court Principle Of Parity Applies Even If Earlier Order Was Declared 'Not A Precedent': Orissa High Court Acquisition Lapses If Authority Inactive For Over 5 Years Excluding Stay; Bar On Subsequent Purchasers Inapplicable If Land Stood Released: Madhya Pradesh High Court Senior Citizens Act  | Summary Eviction Remedy Cannot Be Extended To Daughter-In-Law As She Is Neither 'Child' Nor 'Relative': Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 471 IPC | Mere Absence Of Direct Forgery Does Not Absolve Accused Of Using Forged Document As Genuine: Rajasthan High Court Criminal Proceedings Against Husband's Relatives Cannot Continue On Vague & Omnibus Allegations Without Specific Overt Acts: Telangana High Court Magistrate's Inability To Recall Order Does Not Preclude High Court From Restoring Cheque Bounce Complaint Dismissed In Default: Punjab & Haryana High Court

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

26 September 2024 3:49 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