C.O.C.P NO.808 OF 2007 :{ 1 }: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DATE OF DECISION: FEBRUARY 16 ,2011 Priya Chadha .....Petitioner VERSUS Salil Chadha ....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? PRESENT: Mr. A. K. Chopra, Sr.Advocate with Mr. Harminder Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. R. S. Cheema, Sr.Advocate with Ms. Tanu Bedi, Advocate, for the respondent. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. Though the petitioner-wife has invoked the contempt jurisdiction of this Court, pleading violation of the conditions contained in the agreed order passed by this Court, while disposing of Civil Revision Petition, more than necessary efforts were unsuccessfully made by different Benches for this estranged couple to resolve their matrimonial dispute or differences. Long ago, while disposing of Criminal Revision filed by C.O.C.P NO.808 OF 2007 :{ 2 }: the present petitioner, this Court, on 20.2.1998, recorded the following agreed terms and conditions, which the couple had consented to follow:- “i) The husband shall forthwith furnish an accommodation to accommodate the wife and the children. It is agreed that the wife and children shall be put in the Ist floor of house no.294, Sector 16, Chandigarh. ii) The entire Ist floor shall be in exclusive possession of the wife and children except the portion locked by some other co-owner. After taking the children and wife today to the Sector 16 hour and making the minimum arrangements for their living the husband would be permitted to take Ms.Gayatri to his parent's house in Panchkula and would return the custody of the child back to the mother (wife) by 9 PM respectively. iii) The child would start to come in Carmel Convent in Chandigarh from Monday i.e. 23.2.1998. It shall be the responsibility of the husband to take up child from Sector 16 house to the school and after the school is over, he would bring the child back to Sector 16 house. iv) The parties would spend some time together with their children i.e. An hour or 1-1/2 hour and thereafter Ms.Gayatri would be permitted to accompany the father to the house in Panchkula to attend tuition and to be with her grand parents. Ms.Gayatri would be restored to C.O.C.P NO.808 OF 2007 :{ 3 }: the custody of the mother every day between 7.00 pm to 7.30 pm and the parties would spend again time together in the evening for having dinner etc., thus, resulting in some mutual talkings and better understanding of each other and their children. v) The parties would have mutual discussion and counseling from friends and especially the mother of the wife to amicably settle all their disputes and differences. The custody till the next date of hearing would be of the mother and would not be disturbed by any person except as per the agreed order. vi) The younger daughter Rajeshwari is not keeping well. She will be taken to the doctor by the husband, wife and the daughter forthwith and the parties are at liberty to come to some understanding even by visiting other minor daughter to the house at Panchkula. As per the conceded position, the couple thereafter started living together and it is only on 13.9.2006 that husband is alleged to have walked out of the house, for which the petitioner-wife has now approached this Court to take action for contempt, pleading that he has violated the agreed terms. As can be seen, in between much has happened between this couple, which include even lodging of criminal prosecution by the petitioner. The bitterness that has developed between this couple is well reflected from the proceedings. The respondent on his part would plead that he had C.O.C.P NO.808 OF 2007 :{ 4 }: adhered to all the terms and conditions in true letters and spirit and had furnished exclusive accommodation on the first floor of 2 kanals house in Sector 16 to the petitioner and the children, besides providing all possible luxuries and modern amenities. He would rather blame the petitioner for not permitting the children to meet the grand parents, who live in Panchkula and they were not even allowed to enter the house in Sector 16. The respondent would also term the contempt petition to be totally frivolous and devoid of any merit. He would rather point out that the petitioner is staying in a family house whereas the respondent is on the road. He would also highlight the fact that younger daughter has walked out of the house in February 2007 to live with respondent-father. The petitioner had lodged an FIR against the respondent, alleging harassment on account of dowry. Such bitterness having developed between this matrimonial couple, hardly any sanctity can now be attached to the terms which they had agreed to abide by in the year 1998. That ofcourse, can not be advanced as an excuse by the respondent to discharge his liability towards his children. In the present contempt petition, the Court may not be called upon to ask the parties to discharge their respective responsibilities. Pure and simple request made in the present petition is to take cognizance of the violation of the agreed conditions by the respondent and to summon and punish him for contempt to maintain the dignity of the court. From the pleadings, it can not be said that there is any deliberate disobedience or willful defiance of the conditions agreed to in the undertaking, for which action to punish C.O.C.P NO.808 OF 2007 :{ 5 }: the respondent would be called for. In view of the intervening facts and circumstances, where both the parties may not be able to absolve themselves of respective conducts, it would be unreasonable to take notice of violation of any condition, even if it be there. This is being noticed for the sake of appreciation and should not be taken to mean that this Court has expressed any view in regard to violation of the agreed terms. There being no deliberate disobedience, no case for contempt is revealed and the contempt petition accordingly is dismissed. The petitioner, if so advised, may have her any other remedy of ensuring some arrangement or obligation, if any, on the part of the respondent either to maintain her or the children, by moving an appropriate proceedings before any Forum having jurisdiction to deal with such issues. February 16,2011 (RANJIT SINGH ) khurmi JUDGE