High CourtsDivision Bench(2018) 04 CHH CK 0267

Manish Nigam vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh High Court · Decided on 20 April 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA, J · RAM PRASANNA SHARMA
RESULT
Disposed of
CASE NUMBER
FAM No. 81, 251, 347 of 2017

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

17 paragraphs · 306 words
1.

Heard.

2.

FAM No.81 of 2017 arises out of a decree of divorce granted by the trial Court on an application under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act

preferred by the respondent husband Arun Singh Thakur.

3.

CRR No.347 of 2017 has been preferred by wife Smt Mamta Singh seeking enhancement of the amount of maintenance under Section 127 Cr.P.C.

which has been allowed in part by the Court below.

4.

CRR No.251 of 2017 has been preferred by Arun Singh Thakur challenging the order passed by the Family Court under Section 127 Cr.P.C. partly

allowing the application in favour of Smt Mamta Singh and two children.

5.

The parties were referred for mediation which has been reported to be successful. A mutual settlement has been arrived at between the parties

which is reduced to writing by the Mediation Centre of the High Court on 18.09.2017. The settlement is signed by both the parties and the mediator.

6.

In view of the settlement, the decree of divorce allowed in favour of Arun Singh Thakur dissolving his marriage with Smt Mamta Singh is set aside;

instead a decree of divorce in the terms of settlement is allowed.

7.

Similarly, the amount of maintenance which Arun Singh Thakur has agreed to pay to his wife and one child namely Prince Singh Thakur shall bind

the parties and the impugned order of maintenance passed by the Family Court is set aside. The part of the settlement governing maintenance shall

operate between the parties.

8.

In FAM No.81 of 2017, the impugned decree is substituted by a decree of divorce in terms of the settlement.

9.

The entire settlement shall form part of the decree.

10.

Accordingly, all the three matters are disposed of in the terms as stated supra. A decree be drawn in terms of settlement.