← Library
High Court of DelhiCM(M)/467/2012

Sundesh Singh v. Ashima Singh

2015-07-03Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Vipin Sanghi2 pages

$-25-26 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CM(M) 348/2012 &C.M.NOS.8223/2012, 9242/2015 SMT ASHIMA Petitioner Through:

Mr. Lai Singh Thakur, Adv. a/w petitioner in person versus SUNDESH SINGH Respondent Through:

Mr. M.P. Singh, Adv. with Mr.

Puneet Agrawal + CM(M) 467/2012 & C.M. No.7224/2012 SUNDESH SINGH Petitioner Through:

Mr. M.P. Singh, Adv. with Mr.

Puneet Agrawal versus ASHIMA SINGH ....Respondent Through:

Mr. Lai Singh Thakur, Adv. a/w respondent in person

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR.

JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI

ORDER

% 03.07.2015 Learned counsels state that a settlement has been reached between the parties which is contained in a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) dated 02.07.2015. The original settlement cum MOU signed by the appellant as well as the father and attorney of the respondent and attested by two witnesses has been placed on record along with the affidavit of the By:AMULYA

petitioner's wife in C.M.(M) No.348/2012. Similarly, the affidavit of the father and attorney of the respondent Sundesh Singh has been filed on reeord in C.M. (M) No.467/2012 preferred by Sundesh Singh.

Under the terms of the settlement, it has been agreed between the parties that Sundesh Singh, the husband shall make payment of Rs.l5 laes towards full and final settlement of the claims of the petitioner/wife towards her maintenance and alimony. The husband has also agreed to pay Rs. 10,000/- per month for the upbringing of the minor child who is in the custody of the mother till she attains the age of 18 years. The parties have agreed that they shall mutually obtain divorce and shall withdraw all other proceedings instituted by them against each other in terms of the MOU. The petitioner wife as well as the attorney and father of the respondent are both present and have been shown the MOU.

Both of them state that the said MOU has been executed by them of their own free will and accord, and they undertake to the Court to stand by the same. The father and attorney of the husband has also stated that he has acted on the specific instructions of his son. The MOU is accordingly marked as Exhibit X/1. The petition stands disposed of in terms of the MOU Exhibit X/1, which shall continue to bind the parties.

VIPIN SANGHI, J JULY 03, 2015 sr