- (1.) This transfer petition has been filed by the petitioner-wife, seeking transfer of the Divorce Petition M.C. No. 2168 of 2006 titled as Rakesh Malviya v. Neeti Malviya, filed by the respondent-husband, from the court of Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore (Karnataka) to the Family Court, Hoshangabad (Madhya Pradesh).
(2.) After issuance of notice on 7th December 2007, efforts were made on various occasions to bring about a comprehensive settlement of the matrimonial discord between the parties. On 6thSeptember 2008, the parties agreed for mediation. Accordingly, the parties were referred to the Delhi High Court Mediation Centre. Ultimately, in proceedings before the Supreme Court Lok Adalat held on 25th April 2009, it was reported that the parties had arrived at a settlement. The settlement agreement dated 24thApril 2009 was taken on record. The relevant portion of the order passed on 25th April 2009 is extracted below: ...One of the terms so agreed upon is that the husband is to pay to the wife an amount of Rupees sixty five lakhs on or before 28th February, 2010. It is now agreed before us that the said amount of Rupees sixty five lakhs shall be deposited in this Court as per the schedule of dates mentioned in the agreement. The amount, so deposited, shall be put in a Fixed Deposit Receipt for a period upto 1st May, 2010. It is also agreed that when full amount in terms of the agreement is deposited, the parties shall, immediately thereafter, move a joint application for grant of divorce by mutual consent. On the passing of the decree for divorce, the amount deposited in this Court shall be released to Neeti without any delay.
(3.) The matter remained pending for some time but the parties continued to discharge their obligations under the terms of settlement and when the case came up for hearing on 29th January 2010, it was stated that the respondent-husband shall deposit the last instalment of money, in terms of the settlement, by 28thFebruary 2009, which was done. However, when the matter came up for final orders on 10thMay 2010, learned Counsel for the parties sought time to go through the two judgments of this Court in Manish Goel v. Rohini Goel, 2010 2 Scale 332 and Smt. Poonam v. Sumit Tanwar, 2010 3 JT 259, and assist the Court on the question whether the period of second motion in terms of Sub-section (2) of Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short "the Act") can be waived or reduced by this Court.;