IBC Moratorium | Criminal Court Cannot Direct Disbursal Of Corporate Debtor's Assets To Complainant Pending CIRP: Supreme Court Section 138 NI Act | Failure To Implead Company As Accused Renders Complaint Fatally Defective; Section 319 CrPC Cannot Be Used To Cure Such Fundamental Defect: Supreme Court 'Last Seen Theory' Alone Cannot Sustain Conviction: Supreme Court Acquits Man In Murder Case 'Every Lawyer Has A Duty To Act Decently': Supreme Court Modifies Suspension Of Advocate For Misconduct In Court Premises Mere Declaration Of 'Transitional Area' Under Article 243-Q(1)(a) Of Constitution Does Not Automatically Convert Rural Area Into Urban Area: Supreme Court Supreme Court Quashes Externment Order, Terms Non-Compliance With Natural Justice A "Travesty Of Constitutional Guarantees" 'Certiorari Is Not Appellate': Supreme Court Rejects Plea In Decades-Old Co-operative Society Membership Dispute Victim Must Authorize Settlement: Supreme Court Rules Informants Cannot Quash Criminal Cases Without Real Victim's Consent State Cannot Pick And Choose: Supreme Court Restores Right To Retrospective Regularisation For Daily Wage Employees Order VI Rule 17 CPC | Amendment of Plaint After Commencement Of Trial Cannot Be Allowed Without Proving Due Diligence: Supreme Court Discrepancy Between Ocular Testimony And Medical Evidence Creates Reasonable Doubt: Supreme Court Order VI Rule 17 & Order VIII Rule 6A CPC | Counter Claim Cannot Be Permitted After Trial Concludes When Party Fails To Pay Court Fees Initially: Supreme Court Nominee Holds Insurance Proceeds In Trust For Legal Heirs; Supreme Court Directs Equitable Distribution Pending Succession Proceedings PC Act | Court Must Impose Statutory Minimum Imprisonment Upon Conviction Under Sections 7 And 13(2): Supreme Court Supreme Court Quashes Corruption Case Against Official Caught In Factional Crossfire Retaliatory Counterblasts Cannot Be Used As Weapons Of Harassment: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Complaint Over Civil Land Dispute Order VII Rule 11 CPC | Court Must Defer Question Of Ad-Valorem Court Fee To Evidence When Possession Status Is Disputed: Supreme Court Minor Shortfall In Earnest Money Deposit Does Not Vitiate Auction Sale If It Causes No Prejudice: Supreme Court 'Flimsy And Untenable': Supreme Court Cancels Bail Of Accused In Gruesome 'Petrol-Burning' Murder Case Parity Is Not A Mechanical Mathematical Formula: Supreme Court Rejects Bail Plea Of Murder Accused Article 142 Constitution of India | Supreme Court May Protect Retiral Benefits Of Employees Whose Caste Certificates Are Invalidated In Exceptional Cases Omission Of CGST Rule 96(10) Applies To All Pending Proceedings: Supreme Court Mere Marking Does Not Prove Contents: Supreme Court Clarifies Evidence Law In Testamentary Proceedings Arbitral Tribunal Under Section 16 Of A&C Act Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Determine Arbitrability Of Claims Including Excepted Matters: Supreme Court Arbitration Agreement Can Be Incorporated Into A Personal Guarantee Through A Composite Transaction: Supreme 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