IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MA No.226 of 2009 11 12.8.2010 Pammi Kumari, Wife of Narendra Singh, Daughter of Raj Roshan Singh, Resident of village- Udwant Nagar, Police Station – Udwant Nagar, District Bhojpur ..... Respondent/ Appellant VERSUS Narendra Singh, Son of Bindeshwari Singh, Resident of village- Girdharian, P.O. & P.S. Dinara, District Rohtas ..... Petitioner .. Respondent -------- For the Appellant : M/s Bindhyachal Singh, Ram Binod Singh and Sushil Kumar Singh, Advocates For the Respondent : M/s K.N.Choubey, Sr. Advocate Ambuj Nayan Choubey, Siddharth Harsh and Ritu Priyadarshini, Advocates --------- Heard the parties. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 4.3.2009 passed by the Principal Judge, Sasaram, Rohtas whereby he has allowed Matrimonial Case No.26/2003 filed by the respondent husband and has granted a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty. On behalf of the appellant wife it has been submitted that the decree of divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act was sought on the ground of 2 mental disorder and desertion but none of these two grounds could be proved by the respondent as would appear from the order under appeal yet the decree sought for was granted on the basis of a criminal case lodged by the appellant against her husband and others under Section 498A of the IPC. It has been submitted that such a course was not open to the learned Principal Judge and mere filing of a case for cruelty against the husband could not be treated as an act of cruelty by the wife at least till the criminal case was finally concluded one way or the other. Admittedly, the criminal case is still pending. Before coming to the merits of the appeal, it is relevant to take note of one subsequent development. After the judgment and decree on 4.3.2009, as per counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent, he has married another lady on 14.4.2009 and now, he has a child from that marriage. In view of such subsequent development, an issue arose whether the subsequent marriage is permitted in view of Section 15 of the Hindu Marriage Act but the 3 parties agreed, at the instance of the Court, to resort to amicable settlement of their dispute and as a result, the appellant has agreed to accept the decree of divorce not on the ground mentioned by the learned Principal Judge but by way of consent provided the appellant pays a permanent alimony in a lump sum of Rs.six lakhs. The respondent husband, who is present in Court, has also agreed to the aforesaid terms of compromise but on his behalf it has been submitted that he should be given three years time to arrange for the money and for paying the entire amount of Rs. six lakhs to the appellant. To this suggestion, the appellant has agreed on the condition that the present maintenance at the rate of Rs.1200-/ (Twelve hundred) per month should continue to be paid to the appellant till the entire amount of Rs.six lakhs is paid to her through bank drafts issued in her name. This term has also been accepted by the respondent husband. As a result of aforesaid compromise, this appeal is disposed of in terms of the compromise. The decree of divorce shall be treated to have been issued on the ground of consent and as a result of compromise, the 4 respondent must pay in total an amount of Rs.six lakhs within a period of three years from today. It is expected that yearly payment shall not be less than Rs.two lakhs. Till the entire amount of Rs.six lakhs is paid to the appellant through bank drafts drawn in her favour, the respondent shall continue to pay monthly maintenance at the rate of Rs.1200/- per month. As per agreement between the parties, on receipt of full amount of Rs. six lakhs from the respondent towards permanent alimony, the appellant shall withdraw or abandon the criminal case bearing GR No.1913 of 2003, Trial No.1366 o9f 2009 arising out of Udwant Nagar PS Case No.142 of 2003 pending before SDJM, Ara. It is also agreed that till the said criminal case is finally withdrawn, the appellant shall not pursue that case so as to create any difficulties for the respondent and such a course shall be permitted by the court concerned. Till the withdrawal of the case, no active steps shall be taken in the said proceeding and the concerned court is expected to keep the proceedings stayed for the period of three years indicated above. 5 The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J.) sk