SANJEEV KAPOOR versus CHANDANA KAPOOR & ORS.

SANJEEV KAPOOR versus CHANDANA KAPOOR & ORS.

Because Section 125 and Section 127 Cr.P.C. expressly permit the Magistrate to vary or cancel orders and to direct payments 'from time to time', the embargo in Section 362 Cr.P.C. is relaxed in proceedings under Section 125; therefore the Family Court was competent to set aside its earlier settlement order and...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: SANJEEV KAPOOR; Respondent: CHANDANA KAPOOR & ORS.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
19 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / On Appeal to the Supreme Court Against High Court Order Dated 05.11.2019 Dismissing Petition Under Section 482 Cr.p.c.
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Maintenance, Section 125 Cr.p.c., Functus Officio, Inherent Jurisdiction, Execution of Orders, Settlement, Section 362 Cr.p.c., Section 482 Cr.p.c.
Criminal Procedure Family Law Maintenance Section 125 Cr.p.c. Functus Officio Inherent Jurisdiction Execution of Orders Settlement +2 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SANJEEV KAPOOR

Appellant

CHANDANA KAPOOR & ORS.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / On Appeal to the Supreme Court Against High Court Order Dated 05.11.2019 Dismissing Petition Under Section 482 Cr.p.c.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Family Court could set aside its earlier order disposing of a Section 125 Cr.P.C. petition on settlement and restore the petition
  2. 2 Whether Section 362 Cr.P.C. prohibited the Magistrate from altering or reviewing the order in the Section 125 proceeding
  3. 3 Whether the High Court erred in refusing to exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to interfere

Ratio Decidendi

Because Section 125 and Section 127 Cr.P.C. expressly permit the Magistrate to vary or cancel orders and to direct payments 'from time to time', the embargo in Section 362 Cr.P.C. is relaxed in proceedings under Section 125; therefore the Family Court was competent to set aside its earlier settlement order and restore the Section 125 petition where the husband failed to honour the settlement, and the High Court correctly declined to interfere under Section 482 Cr.P.C.; appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • High Court order dated 05.11.2019 dismissing the Section 482 Cr.P.C. petition is upheld; Family Court order dated 05.01.2019 restoring the Section 125 petition stands.