PRANAY MAJUMDAR versus BINA MAJUMDAR

Citation: [2007] 1 S.C.R. 1089 · Decided: 17-01-2007 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: AR. LAKSHMANAN · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

PRANAY MAJUMDAR 
A 
-
t 
v. 
BINA MAJUMDAR 
I JANUARY17,2007 
[DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN AND V.S. SIRPURKAR, JJ.] 
B 
Special Marriage Act, 1954-S.27(d)-Divorce petition-Settlement-
Parties not living together since I 7 years-Living together peacefully by 
both parties not possible-Offer of husband of Rs.3 lacs by way of 
permanent alimony_ to wife in full and final settlement, accepted by wife- c 
Decree of divorce granted 
Appellant-husband filed a suit for divorce. Trial Court decreed the 
same. On appeal, High Court set aside the decree. 
Husband filed appeal before this Court. This Court passed an order 
D 
on 26.9.2006 that the parties are not living together since 1990 and there 
"r 
is no hope for parties living together peacefully. Appellant-husband offered 
a sum of Rs.3 lacs by way of permanent alimony to wife in full and final 
settlement of the entire claim. This Court directed wife to consider the 
offer. Both the parties filed a Joint Memorandum of settlement duly signed 
E 
by all the parties. 
Disposing of the appeal, the Court 
HELD: It is represented by the appellant-husband that pursuant to the 
joint Memorandum of Settlement, a sum of Rs.3 lacs in full and final 
F 
settlement of all the claims of the respondent-wife as a permanent alimony 
""'11 
was paid to her by way of a demand draft. The respondent-wife has also 
stated that she has received the demand draft for a sum of Rs.3,00,000 
(three lacs). The respondent, as per Memorandum of Settlement, would not 
claim any future claim for her and her daughter who is residing with her 
first husband. In view of the settlement now reached between the parties, 
G 
the order of the High Court impugned in this appeal is set aside and there 
will be a decree of divorce as ordered by the trial court in respect of the 
appellant and the respondent. [Para 6) [1092-E-F} 
-..... 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 267 of2007. 
H 
1089 
"--
1090 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(2007] 1 S.C.R. 
A 
From the Final Judgment/Order dated 2.12.2003 of the High Court of 
Calcutta in F.M.A. No. 1401/2000. 
S.B. Upadhyay, Sr. Adv., Santosh Mishra, Shiv Mangal Sharma and 
Sharmila Upadhyay for the Appellant. 
B 
Anoop Kumar Srivastava and Rameshwar Prasad Goyal for the 
c 
Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN, J. : Delay condoned. 
2. Leave granted. 
3. This appeal is directed against the final Judgment/Order dt.02.12.2003 
passed in FMA No.1401 of 2000 by the High Court of Calcutta. 
D 
4. The appellant before us is the husband of the respondent herein. 
The appellant filed an application under Section 27(d) of the Special 
Marriage Act, 1954 in the City Civil Court at Calcutta being Matrimonial Suit 
No.268of1991 seeking divorce from the respondent alleging cruelty. Later, 
the suit was transferred to the Family Court, Calcutta and re-numbered as 
E 
Matrimonial Suit No.10311995. The suit filed by the appellant was decreed 
by the trial court. Aggrieved against the order of the trial court, the 
respondent filed F.M.A.No.1401 of 2000 in the High Court and the High 
Court by the impugned order, allowed the F.M.A.No.1401 of 2000. Hence, 
the present appeal has been filed in this Court. During the pendency of the 
appeal, we_passed the following Order on 26.09.2006 :-
F 
G 
H 
"After hearing both parties, we pass the following Order on 
25.08.2006 :-
"The Husband is the petitioner before us, who had filed the 
petition for divorce before the Family Court, which was allowed. 
Aggrieved against the said order, the respondent-wife filed an 
appeal before the High Court, which was allowed. Aggrieved 
against the order of the High Court, Husband has come up before 
us by way of filing the instant special leave petition. 
It is now stated that though the marriage took place on 25.9.1987, 
y 
+ ;._. 
-
) 
, .. 
l 
PRANAY MAJUMDAR v. BINA MAJUMDAR [LAKSHMANAN. J.] 
1091 
the parties are not living together from 29.6.1990 onwards and there 
A 
is no hope for the parties living together peacefully. The learned 
counsel for the respondent-wife has also submitted that living 
together hereafter by both parties is not possible, and therefore, if 
suitable compensation by way of permanent alimony is granted, an 
order can be passed dissolving the marriage. The learned counsel 
for the petitioner-husband offers a sum of Rs.3,00,000 by way of 
permanent alimony to the respondent-wife in full and final settlement 
of the entire claim. The learned couns

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.