FAO.No.M-310 of 2010 (O&M) #1# IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH FAO.No.M-310 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 15.7.2011 Jasjit Singh Bakhshi ….Appellant Vs. Mandeep Kaur ….Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. Ranjan Lakhanpal, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Ramneek Vasudeva, Advocate for the respondent. Jaswant Singh, J By filing the instant appeal, appellant-husband has assailed the judgment dated 17.8.2010 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Ropar whereby a petition filed by him under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short “1955 Act”) seeking decree of divorce has been dismissed. It is stated that both the parties were married on 31.7.2005 at Delhi as per Anand Karaj (Sikh) rites and that both of them were divorcees at the time of marriage. Due to temperamental differences, appellant- husband filed a petition under Section 13 of 1955 Act seeking decree of divorce alleging that the respondent and her parents started misbehaving with him and that the respondent used to pick up quarrels with the appellant and his family members, which caused mental and physical cruelty to the petitioner. It is further stated that a criminal case was also lodged against the appellant-husband and his family members at Police Station Anandpur FAO.No.M-310 of 2010 (O&M) #2# Sahib. Upon notice, respondent-wife filed written statement inter alia stating that a huge amount was spent by her parents at the time of marriage and a child was born out of the said wedlock and that the petitioner and his family were having full knowledge regarding pregnancy as well as birth of the child. The attitude of the respondent-wife remained quite normal and that she never misbehaved with the appellant-husband or his family members. After hearing both the sides, learned Additional District Judge, (FTC), Ropar dismissed the petition vide the impugned order dated 17.8.2010, hence the present petition. At the time of arguments, learned counsel for both the parties pointed out that in Crl. Revision No.2113 of 2010 pending between the parties before this Court, the matter was referred to Mediation Centre for amicable settlement. It seems that before the Mediation Centre, the parties arrived at a compromise and the same was reduced into writing in the presence of the learned Mediator on 23.5.2011 in which it was inter alia resolved by way of mutual consent that the amount shall be disbursed after grant of divorce by way of mutual consent in the present appeal bearing FAO No.M310- of 2010. Today, both the parties are present in person and made their statements separately. Respondent-wife has stated in her statement that as per the compromise dated 23.5.2011 she shall abide by the terms and conditions recorded therein and she has no objection if the impugned order dated 17.8.2010 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Ropar is set aside and the decree of divorce by way of mutual consent is granted and that the amount of Rs.5 lacs by way of three demand drafts tagged with Crl. FAO.No.M-310 of 2010 (O&M) #3# R.No.2113 of 2010 be handed over to her after grant of divorce by mutual consent. On the other hand, appellant-husband has accepted the statement made by the respondent-wife and agreed to abide by the same. He also stated that if need arises, the drafts shall be re-validated. In view of the aforesaid statements made by both the parties, present petition is treated under Section 13-B of 1955 Act and the same is allowed. Judgment dated 17.8.2010 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Ropar is set aside and the marriage between both the parties is dissolved by way of mutual consent. Decree sheet be preared accordingly. July 15, 2011 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE