RSA No.3958 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No.3958 of 2008 Date of Decision: January 22, 2010 Raghbir Singh ...... Appellant Versus Kulbir Kaur ...... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Tewari Present: Mr.R.S.Chahal, Advocate for the appellant. **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Ajay Tewari, J. This appeal has been filed against concurrent judgments of the Courts below dismissing the suit of the appellant for recovery against the respondent, his wife. The allegation made by the appellant was that he had advanced an amount of Rs. 1,15,000/- to the respondent as permanent settlement for divorce by mutual consent but later on she resiled and did not agree for the said divorce. It is not disputed that the divorce matter has now been carried up to this Court at the instance of the appellant by way of FAO No. 307-M of 2006 wherein also the plea of the appellant is that after having received the amount the respondent cannot resile from the agreement to grant divorce. The following question has been proposed:- “Whether Ex.PW-3/A has been misinterpreted by the Courts RSA No.3958 of 2008 2 below?” The Courts below have held that the amount paid to the wife was in any case by way of maintenance and that a reading of the said agreement Ex.PW-3/A did not suggest that there was any stipulation that the respondent-wife would be liable to return the said amount in case she resiled from the agreement to grant divorce. Learned counsel has not been able to persuade me that there is any mis-interpretation of Ex.PW-3/A. Consequently this appeal is dismissed holding the question proposed against the appellant. No costs. (AJAY TEWARI) JUDGE January 22, 2010 sunita