Ravi Singhal v. Manali Singhal

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J. JANUARY 29, 2019 'bs' (Corrected and released on 18th February 2019)

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 29th January, 2019. + CM(M) 80/2018 & CM No.2196/2018 (for stay) RAVI SINGHAL ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Abhimanyu Bhandari, Mr. Tanmay Mehta, Mr. Ankit Virmani, Mr. Rinkel Singh, Mr. Krishan Tewary and Ms. Nimisha Narayan, Advs. Versus MANALI SINGHAL ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Prosenjeet Banerjee, Ms. Meera Menon, Ms. Vinita Sashidharan and Mr. Deepak Singh Rawat, Advs. with respondent-in-person. AND + CM(M) 232/2018 MANALI SINGHAL ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Prosenjeet Banerjee, Ms. Meera Menon, Ms. Vinita Sashidharan and Mr. Deepak Singh Rawat, Advs. with petitioner-in-person. Versus RAVI SINGHAL ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Abhimanyu Bhandari, Mr. Tanmay Mehta, Mr. Ankit Virmani, Mr. Rinkel Singh, Mr. Krishan Tewary and Ms. Nimisha Narayan, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW 1. The husband as well as the wife, being dissatisfied with the order dated 20th November, 2017 (in HMA No.519/2017 filed by the husband for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce against the wife on the ground of cruelty, of the Court of Principal Judge, Family Courts, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi) partly allowing the application of the husband for amendment of the petition for divorce, have preferred these petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. Notice of both the petitions was issued and the petitions are being listed together for hearing. The counsels were heard on 26th July, 2018, when, vide detailed order of that date certain queries were made from the counsel for the husband and on his request for time to consider, hearing adjourned. The counsels were further heard yesterday, when again on the request of counsel for husband, the hearing was adjourned to today. The counsels have been heard further. 3. The husband, in paras 18 to 24 of the divorce petition dated 1st June, 1998 pleaded as under: "18. It is relevant to mention that the petitioner had visited the mother of the respondent in England where she was under treatment. During the said visit the mother of the respondent asked the petitioner to arrange for a residential accommodation for the respondent in Delhi and the parties should file divorce by mutual consent. After coming back to India, the mother of the respondent was immediately admitted in All India Institute of Medical Sciences and was critically ill. Without informing the petitioner or settling any terms with the petitioner, the respondent and her father got an agreement prepared for the petitioner to sign. On 4.11.94 when the petitioner and his parents visited the house of the mother of the respondent at 37, Aurangazeb Road, New Delhi, the respondent and her father and brother insisted upon the petitioner and his parents to sign the said agreement. The petitioner and his parents were subjected to emotional blackmail on the ground of the illness of the mother of the respondent. The respondent also represented that since her mother was dying, she wanted to see that all her disputes with the petitioner have been settled emicable by showing her the signed agreement. She further assured the petitioner and his parents that the said agreement shall not be implemented and that it is only for the satisfaction of her mother that she wanted him to sign. The petitioner was also threatened by the respondent and her father that in case he would not sign the said agreement, he would be subjected to all kinds of litigation and adverse publicity in the newspaper. Soon after the signing of the said agreement, i.e. within 6 days thereafter, the mother of the respondent passed away. 19. Thereafter the parties met number of times to decide about the terms of the settlement for filing the mutual consent divorce petition and on 21.11.95 a petition for divorce by mutual consent was sent by the petitioner to the respondent but the respondent refused to sign the same. 20. Thereafter on 28.10.97, the respondent filed a Suit for Specific Pe