Rachna Chauhan vs Muzahid Khan @ Rahul Chohan)

Heard finally with the consent of both the parties.

In this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has called in question the legality, validity and propriety of the order dated 21/08/2018 (Annexure P-1) passed in Case No. 445/2011 by the Additional Chief Judge, Family Court Gwalior (M.P.) whereby the Family Court has directed the petitioner to comply with one of the terms and conditions of compromise entered into between the parties.

Grievance of the petitioner is that the Trial Court is pressurizing the petitioner to satisfy one of the condition of the compromise whereas terms and conditions of compromise have to be fulfilled by both the parties. The Trial Court in its order dated 23/08/2018 has directed the petitioner to satisfy clause No.6 of the terms and conditions, in view of the fact that according to the clause No.5 respondents have already deposited Rs. Thirty Four Lacs in CCD, therefore, according to clause No.6 petitioner is obliged to hand over the vacant possession of the house by putting a lock and depositing the key before the Trial Court.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the terms and conditions of compromise are to be complied with by both the parties. The respondents are not complying with condition No.3, therefore, compromise is not taking place and the Trial Court is not in a position to conclude the proceedings pending before it.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that in compliance of the terms and conditions of compromise, he has deposited Rs. Thirty Four Lacs as permanent alimony and the petitioner is avoiding to comply with the terms and conditions. Moreover, because of interim relief granted by this Court, the Trial Court is unable to deliver final judgment. The present petition may be disposed of with the direction to the Trial Court to decide the matter strictly on the strength of compromise submitted before the Trial Court.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

This Court on various occasions conducted camera proceedings where both the petitioner and respondents alongwith their counsel were present, but nothing concrete could be arrived at.

Looking to the fact that matter is lingering on because of interim stay granted by this Court, it would be appropriate to dispose of the petition with the following directions :-

The Trial Court is directed to proceed strictly in accordance with the terms and conditions of compromise dated 11/01/2018 entered into between the petitioner and respondents (Annexure P-4).

The petitioner as well as respondents are directed to cooperate before the Trial Court and comply with their part as per the terms and conditions of compromise without any further delay.

The Trial Court shall not hand over the key to the respondents and also shall not disburse amount of Thirty Four Lacs deposited by the respondents until and unless terms and conditions of compromise are complied with by both the parties.

The Trial Court shall make all endeavor to finally decide the case in terms of compromise as expeditiously as possible within a period of four weeks.

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.