Holding

The Court upheld the mutual‑consent divorce and ordered the respondent to comply with the agreed financial settlement, directing withdrawal of all other proceedings.

Summary

The Supreme Court considered a petition for divorce by mutual consent filed by Preeti Singh and Sandeep Singh under Section 13(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act. The parties had reached a compromise in which the respondent paid Rs. 1.5 lakhs to the petitioner, deposited Rs. 1.25 lakhs and Rs. 30,000 in the name of his minor daughter, and agreed to transfer 2000 units of a seven‑year monthly income unit valued at Rs. 20,000 and the interest on a Rs. 32,000 term deposit. The Court examined compliance with these settlement terms, noted the respondent’s failure to deliver the units and interest, and accepted his undertaking to do so within six months. It directed that all other proceedings be withdrawn, the deposited sums remain in the minor’s name until she attains majority, and the respondent fulfill the remaining financial obligations. The decree of divorce by mutual consent was upheld and the petition was disposed, making the divorce effective from the date of the order.

Issues considered

Whether the decree of divorce by mutual consent under Section 13(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act is valid in view of the parties' settlement.
Whether the respondent must comply with the agreed financial obligations, including transfer of income‑unit units and interest on the term deposit, as part of the compromise.
Whether pending proceedings should be withdrawn upon dissolution of the marriage.

Legislation cited

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955s. 13(b)(1), s. 13(b)(2)

Subjects

divorcemutual consentHindu Marriage Actfinancial settlementminorterm depositfamily lawSupreme Court

Judgment

PREETI SINGH A
v.
SANDEEP SINGH AND ORS.

APRIL 25, 1995

(K. RAMASWAMY AND B.L. HANSARIA, JJ.] B

_)' Hindu Marriage Act, 1955: Section 13(B)(I) & (2)

Divorce by Mutual Consent-Petition for-Court's Directions.

Pursuant to an order orthe Court, the appellant and the respondent
c
filed a petition for mutnal divorce as a result of which the marriage
between the parties stood dissolved, and the Respondent had paid Rs. 1.5
Iakhs to the petitioner.

Disposing the petition this court directed : D
1. In terms of the compromise all the proceedings instituted by either
party in any Court or before any authority stand withdrawn and dismissed.
[744-C]
2. The amount of Rs. 1.25 lakhs and Rs. 30,000 deposited by the
E
respondent in the name of his daughter shall remain in her name till she
attains majority. [744-D]
\ 3. The respondent would band over to the petitioner 2000 Units of
.~· Seven Years Monthly Income Unit with Bonus and Growth, 1990 (II)
(Cumulative Growth) valued at Rs. 20,000 deposited on December 31, 1990. F
[744-D-E]
4. The respondent, would further deposit the amount of interest
accrued on the term deposit of Rs. 32,000 made by him in the name of bis
daughter and handover the receipt thereof to the petitioner. [744-E, F, G)
G
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal M.P. No.

> 1207/92 in Traosfer Petition (Cr!.) No. 43 of 1992.

(Under Article 139A(2) of the Constitution of India.)

S.S. Jauhar for the Petitioner. H
743
744 SUPREMECOURTREPORTS [1995) 3 S.C.R.

A D. Goburdhan and Ms. Meenakshi Arora for the Respondents. r
The following Order of the Court was delivered:

Petition under Section 13(B)(l) & (2) of the Hindu Marriage Act,
1956 for a decree of divorce by mutual consent duly signed by both the
B parties is taken on record.

As per the directions of this Court by order dated October 21, 1994,
the parties have filed the petition for mutual divorce. In terms of the order, (
the marriage of the petitioner and the respondent stands dissolved and the
divorce takes effect from today. In terms of the compromise all the
C proceedings instituted by either party in any Court or before any authority
stand withdrawn and dismissed.

In terms of the order passed by this Court earlier, amount of Rs. 1.25
lakhs in addition to Rs. 30,000 were deposited by the respondent in the
D name of daughter Approva. The said amount shall remain in the name of
minor till she attains majority. The respondent has also paid Rs. 1.5 lakhs
to the petitioner.

It is brought to our notice that the respondent had not given to the
petitioner 2000 Units of Seven Years Monthly Income Unit with Bonus and
E Growth, 1990(II) (Cumulative Growth) valued at Rs. 20,000 deposited on
December 31, 1990 which would mature on December 16, 1997. While the
respondent has handed over a 'Term Deposit Receipt No. 555924' dated
17.11.1994 for a sum of Rs. 32,000 deposited in the name of his minor
daughter, which would represent the fixed deposit kept in the name of the
minor in F.D.R. No. 555924, the interest accrued thereon was not added
F to the amount of Rs. 32,000 deposited by the respondent. Learned counsel
for the respondent fairly agreed across the Bar that his client would give
the aforesaid units and deposit the amount of interest of the fixed deposit
in the name of the minor and would hand over the fixed deposit receipt
thereof to the counsel for the petitioner. Counsel for the respondent has
G undertaken to handover the same to the counsel for the petitioner and
obtain the receipt of handing over within six months from today.

The petition is accordingly disposed of. The disputes now totally
stand concluded between the parties.

T.N.A. Petition disposed of.