VENNANGOT ANURADHA SAMIR versus VENNANGOT MOHANDAS SAMIR

Citation: [2015] 12 S.C.R. 276 · Decided: 02-12-2015 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.Y. EQBAL · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
8 
c 
[2015] 12 S.C.R. 276 
VENNANGOT ANURADHA SAMIR 
v. 
VENNANGOT MOHANDAS SAMIR 
(Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 702 of 2015) 
DECEMBER 02, 2015 
[M.Y. EQBALAND C. NAGAPPAN, JJ.] 
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - ss. 13B - Matrimonial 
dispute - Petition for dissolution of marriage on the ground 
of cruelty-Application before Supreme Court for transfer of 
divorce petition pending before Family Court Bombay to 
Family Court at Hyderabad - Matter referred to Supreme 
D Court Mediation Centre for amicable settlement- Settlement 
agreement wherein husband agreed to pay Rs. 12. 5 lakhs to 
his wife towards full and final settlement as alimony and 
maintenance at the time of passing of decree of divorce by 
E mutual consent - While filing application for divorce by 
mutual consent wife stated that she requires funds urgently 
as she is suffering from a life threatening disease and has to 
depend on herself for proper care - Held: Settlement is 
nothing but a contract to dissolve the marriage, the court has 
F to satisfy itself that the contract is legal and valid in the eye 
of law- Fact that the wife was ready for the mutual consent 
divorce after knowing about her medical condition raised a 
suspicion in the mind as to whether the consent obtained 
from the wife is free as required by law for granting the decree 
G of divorce by mutual consent- It was pre-existing duty of the 
husband to provide facilities for the treatment of the petitioner, 
provided the husband has sufficient means and he is 
diligently doing his part in taking care of her -: By the 
settlement agreement the husband is promising to do 
H 
276 
VENNANGOT ANURADHASAMIR v. VENNANGOT 
277 
MOHANDAS SAMIR 
something ·which he is already duty bound, is not a valid A 
consideration for the settlement - Transfer petition is allowed 
- Husband to pay Rs 5 lakhs out of Rs 12, 50,-0001- to the wife 
immediately for her treatment-After the wife is cured or within 
six months which ever is earlier Family Court would take up 
the case along with th~ fresh application filed by the parties B 
uls. 138 for divorce by mutual consent. 
Sureshta Devi vs. Om Prakash ( 1991) 2 SCC 25: 1991 
(1) SCR 27 4,... referred to. 
Indian Contract and Specific Relief Act by Pollock & C 
Mui/a 13th Edn; "Digest of Hindu Law Volume//"; 
Digest of Hindu Law Volume-I/ by Colebrooke -
referred to. 
Case Law Reference 
1991 (1) SCR 274 
referred to. 
Para 17 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Transfer Petition 
(Civil) No. 702 of 2015 
Under Section 13(B) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. 
Arun R. Pedneker (for Ms. Mukti Chowdhary) for the 
Appellant. 
D 
E 
F 
Vinay Navare, Keshav Ranjan, Gwen K. B., Abha R. 
Sharma for Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was deliv~red by 
M. Y. EQBAL, J. 1. Heard learned counsel appearing G 
for the parties and perused the records along with the affidavits 
and petitions. 
2. Admittedly, the marriage of the petitioner with the 
respondent was solemnized in April, 2010 according to Hindu 
H 
278 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2015] 12' S.C.R. 
A Vedic Rites. At the time of marriage, the respondent-husband 
was a bachelor and the petitioner-wife was a divorcee. It was 
a love marriage after both of them came in contact with each 
other in October, 2006. In 2013, some misunderstanding 
developed between the petitioner and the respondent as a 
B result of which the petitioner left the house. 
3. In 2015, the respondent-husband filed a suit for 
dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce under Section 
13( 1)(1 a) of the Hindu Marriage Act on the ground that the 
C petitioner-wife after solemnization of the marriage had 
committed various acts of cruelty. Admittedly, the petitioner is 
living in Hyderabad with her parents. The petitioner, therefore, 
moved an application before this Court for transfer of divorce 
suit pending before the Family Court Bombay to the Family 
D Court at Hyderabad. 
4. The transfer petition was listed before this Court on 
28.08.2015, when, at the request of the counsel forthe parties, 
the matter was referred to Supreme Court Mediation Centre 
E for amicable settlement. ·Before the Mediation Centre, a 
Settlement Agreement was filed on 26.10.2015. In terms of 
the said Settlement Agreement, the respondent-husband 
agreed to pay Rs.12,50,000/- (Twelve Lakhs Fifty Thousand 
only) towards full and final settlement as alimony, maintenance 
F for past and future or any other claim of the petitioner. The 
respondent-husband had agreed to pay t
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.