Read Time: 07 minutes

Synopsis

The Supreme Court has recently brought closure to a sparring couple who filed a total of 21 cases against each other in a matrimonial dispute, by convincing the husband to accept a decree of divorce and pay a permanent alimony to the wife and child, while granting him a visitation right.

"Though mediation has not been successful, we impressed upon parties and the counsels of a desirability of bringing the usual bouquet of cases in matrimonial disputes to an end. In fact, this is an aggravative case where possibly between the parties, there are 21 cases filed by one side or the other!," a bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia noted.

After hearing advocate Prashant Bhushan for the husband and senior advocate Vibha Datta Makhija for the wife, the bench said, "We hope that the parties will adopt a more cooperative attitude for the purposes of the child even though they have not been able to live together."

Hearing a bunch of case transfer petitions, the court came across the number of cases filed by the husband and wife -- 10 and 11 -- respectively against each other.

The court took on record a statement by the husband that a decree of divorce passed on January 24, 2023, by the family court, even though on grounds of cruelty, will not be assailed by him, as he wanted to bring this issue to an end.

With regard to permanent alimony, the court noted that it was agreed that a lump-sum amount of Rs 30 lakhs would be paid by the husband to the wife towards the said purpose within four weeks in full and final settlement of all her claims towards the maintenance, stridhan etc whatever it be.

So far as "the most contentious issue about the visiting rights" was concerned, the bench said that it had given rise to the filing of multiple cases.

"It is necessary that the child should get the benefit of the affection of both the parents even though the parties have not been able to live together," the bench said.

The court ordered visitation rights to the father under the supervised care of a counsellor for the initial period.

"The child apparently has not met the father for some time and thus an unsupervised visit which is what is proposed but it would be appropriate that initially the interaction between the father and the child is in the presence of a counsellor to be appointed by the State Legal Services Authority," the bench said.

"On the child being comfortable with the father, unsupervised interaction can take place and in the vacations, the child can be with the father for about a week once the counsellor is of the view that the interaction is taking place in a manner which facilitates such unsupervised interaction for a longer period of time in the vacations," the bench added.

The court thus ordered that the civil cases would stand withdrawn and the criminal proceedings would stand quashed.

It also recorded a statement by the husband that whatever documents or certificates of the wife were with him would be returned to her.

Case Title: GAURAV GARG v. SHWETA AGARWAL & ORS.ETC