SMT Seema Bansal v Dr. Mayank Bansal

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court
Hon'ble Judges: Dr. Arijit Pasayat
Dr. Mukundakam Sharma
Judgment Date: 2008-10-16
Court Decision / Holding: In view of the agreement, the transfer petition is disposed of on the terms as set out above. The proceedings stand closed. Petition disposed of.
Final Disposition: Petition disposed of

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Seema Bansal

Respondents

Dr. Mayank Bansal

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Kaja I Chandra
• Sanjeev Anand

Counsels for Respondents

• Ashok Mathur

Case Synopsis & Summary

SMT Seema Bansal v Dr. Mayank Bansal concerns a Transfer Petition (Civil) for transfer of a case from Lalitpur to Delhi, referred to the Supreme Court Lok Adalat’s initiative to address marital discord. The matter was scheduled for mediation, and with the help of mediators, the parties arrived at a settlement aimed at resolving all disputes between them. The terms of settlement cover maintenance for the daughter, division of immovable property, and arrangements for visitation, along with the withdrawal of several pending civil and criminal actions. Specifically, the respondent agrees to pay a total of Rs. 10 lakhs for the daughter’s maintenance in annual installments of Rs. 2.5 lakhs, to be deposited in the daughter’s name, with the first installment due by 31 August 2009 and the fourth by 31 August 2012. Till the Rs. 10 lakhs is paid, the respondent is to pay Rs. 7500 per month. The applicant is entitled to 25% share in a stated immovable property. The parties will withdraw pending matters, and the respondent shall have visitation rights on the 2nd and 4th Sundays each month, with prior notice, plus rights on special occasions. The petitioner’s property details require verification. The Court disposed of the petition on these terms, closing the proceedings.

Provisions of Law Cited

Hindu Marriage Act (HMA)Cr.P.C. Section 125IPC Section 406IPC Section 498A

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The applicant sought transfer of the case from Lalitpur to Delhi and, with mediation, the parties arrived at a settlement to resolve the marital disputes. The terms include maintenance for the daughter, a fixed deposit in the daughter’s name, monthly maintenance until the total amount is paid, a 25% share in a specified immovable property, withdrawal of listed civil and criminal cases, and visitation rights for the respondent. The details of the immovable property were noted as subject to verification by the petitioner. The overarching aim was to settle disputes amicably through Lok Adalat mediation to avoid protracted litigation.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondent agreed to the mediation-driven terms, including payment of maintenance in installments, keeping a fixed deposit for the daughter, allowing visitation, and withdrawal of pending proceedings. The parties accepted the property-sharing arrangement and the verification caveat, culminating in the disposition of the transfer petition on the agreed terms.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

[2008) 14 S.C.R. 522 A ## SMT SEEMA BANSAL _.r_ _V._ ## DR. MAYANK BANSAL > (Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 683 of 2007) B OCTOBER 16, 2008 [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND DR. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA, JJ] ~~ - - _Settlement/Compromise Transfer Petition Matrimo[Settlement ]_ c _[nial disputes, before Supreme Court Lok Ada/at ]_[-] - _of With help of mediator parties arrived at certain terms for settlement_ as _regards grant of maintenance to daughter by father and its mode of payment, share of wife in the immov-_ - _able property and visitation rights to father Criminal/civil[In ][terms ]_ D[cases ] _[pending before various courts withdrawn ]_[-] _thereof, transfer petition disposed of_ CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Transfer Petition (C) No. 683 of 2007 E Kaja I Chandra and Sanjeev Anand for the Appellant. Ashok Mathur for the Respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by > DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. 1. Though the present transfer F[petition has ][be.en ][filed for transfer ][of ][a case from Lalitpur ][to ] Delhi, the matter was directed to be listed at the Supreme Court Lok Ada lat which was held on 6th September, 2008, to explore the possibility of bringing out a solution to the marital discords. > With the assistance of the Mediators, the parties were heard G[and following terms for settling the disputes were arrived at: ] 1. Th.at the respondent shall pay a sum of Rs.10 lacs towards maintenance of the daughter (Tanishka). The said sum will be payable in annul instalment of Rs.2.5 ~ \- 522 H SMT SEEMA BANSAL _v._ DR. MAYANK BANSAL [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.] 523 B lacs each payable on or before 31st August. The first A instalment to be paid on or before 31.8.2009. The fourth and last instalment shall be paid on or bE;!fore 31.8.2012. 2. The above amount shall be kept in a fixed deposit in the name of Ms. Taniksha. -" 3. (a) Till such amount of Rs.10 lacs is paid, the respondent shall pay a monthly sum of Rs. 7500/ - (Rupees seven thousand five hundred only) by the end of each month commencing from c September, 2008. - (b) That the petitioner will not be claiming any sums towards alimony and/or maintenance except that she will be entitled to her share of 25% in the immoveable property bearing No.1301, Jaj D Bagh, Manja Pachora, Opposite Gate No.2, Medical College, Jhani. 4. The parties hereby agree to withdraw all the civil/ criminal cases pending in the concerned court which E are mentioned below: - (1) 0.S. No.161 of 2007 (Dr. Mayank Bansal pending before Ld. Civil Judge, Ms. Seema, Senior Division, Lalitpur, U.P.) - (2) Criminal Complaint arising from FIR No.605 of[F ] 2007 u/s 406, 498A IPC, PS Pandav Nagar, Delhi. - (3) HMA No.7005/07 u/s 125 Cr.P.C. pending before Ms. Neeraj Shatiya, Civil Judge, G - Karkadooma, Delhi. 5. The Respondent will be entitled to visitation rights to meet the daughter Tanishka on 2nd and 4th Sunday of each month with prior notice by each party. The Respondent will be entitled to take the child on an H SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 14 S.C.R. 524 |A||outing during such visits. The Respondent will drop|~-| |---|---|---|---| |||the child backinsuch event.|| ||•6.|The Respondent will also bee;:ntitledto meet the|| |||child onorotherspecialoccasionssubjectto|| |B||availability.|| ||7.|The petitioner submits that the particularsofthe|| |||immoveable property mentioned . above have not|,,..__| |||been verified by her and the same are subject to|| |||verification.|| c 2. In terms of the agreement at serial no.3 (a), a draft of Rs. 7 ,500/- for the month of September, 2008, has been handed over to learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in court today. 3. In view of the aforesaid agreement the transfer petition D is disposed of on the terms as set out above. The proceedings as noted above stand closed. .., N.J. Petition disposed of.