Date of the Judgment: 04 October 2021
Citation: Not Available
Judges: S. Ravindra Bhat, J.
Can parties resolve their disputes and withdraw proceedings in the Supreme Court? The Supreme Court addressed this question in a recent case where the parties had settled their differences. This case involves a matrimonial dispute where the petitioner sought a transfer of the case and filed a special leave petition, both of which were dismissed after the parties reached a settlement. The judgment was delivered by Justice S. Ravindra Bhat.
Case Background
The case involves a matrimonial dispute between Swati Chaudhary (petitioner) and Nitesh Kumar (respondent). The petitioner had filed a Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 1689 of 2017 seeking the transfer of a case. Additionally, the petitioner had also filed a Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 8158 of 2018. The specific details of the underlying disputes and the reasons for seeking the transfer and special leave were not detailed in the order. However, the core issue revolved around the parties’ marital discord and related legal proceedings.
Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2017 | Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 1689 of 2017 filed by Swati Chaudhary. |
| 2018 | Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 8158 of 2018 filed by Swati Chaudhary. |
| October 04, 2021 | Supreme Court dismisses both the Transfer Petition and the Special Leave Petition as withdrawn. |
Course of Proceedings
The judgment does not specify the course of proceedings in lower courts. The Supreme Court directly addressed the matter after the parties had reached a settlement.
Legal Framework
There is no specific legal framework discussed in the judgment. The order primarily focuses on the procedural aspect of withdrawing cases upon settlement between parties.
Arguments
The learned counsel for the parties submitted that they had resolved their disputes and the proceedings had been withdrawn pursuant to the settlement. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that she had instructions to withdraw the Transfer Petition as well as the Special Leave Petition.
| Party | Main Submission | Sub-Submission |
|---|---|---|
| Petitioner (Swati Chaudhary) | Withdrawal of petitions due to settlement. | ✓ Instructions to withdraw Transfer Petition. ✓ Instructions to withdraw Special Leave Petition. |
| Respondent (Nitesh Kumar) | Settlement of disputes. | ✓ Resolution of inter se disputes. ✓ Withdrawal of proceedings pursuant to settlement. |
Issues Framed by the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court did not frame any specific issues for determination. The case was resolved based on the settlement between the parties and their request to withdraw the petitions.
Treatment of the Issue by the Court
| Issue | How the Court Dealt with It |
|---|---|
| Withdrawal of petitions | The Court accepted the submission of the parties and dismissed both the Transfer Petition and the Special Leave Petition as withdrawn. |
Authorities
No authorities were cited in this judgment.
Judgment
| Submission | How the Court Treated the Submission |
|---|---|
| Parties have resolved their disputes and the proceedings have been withdrawn pursuant to the said settlement. | The Court accepted the submission. |
| The petitioner has instructions to withdraw the Transfer Petition as well as the Special Leave Petition. | The Court accepted the submission and dismissed the petitions as withdrawn. |
No authorities were cited in this judgment, so there is no table for how authorities were viewed by the court.
What Weighed in the Mind of the Court?
The Court’s decision was primarily influenced by the settlement between the parties and their mutual agreement to withdraw the petitions. The Court’s focus was on facilitating the resolution of the dispute as agreed upon by the parties involved. The court did not delve into the merits of the case, as the parties themselves had resolved the matter.
| Sentiment | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Accepting Settlement | 100% |
| Ratio | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Fact | 0% |
| Law | 0% |
The Court’s decision was straightforward, accepting the parties’ settlement and dismissing the petitions accordingly. There were no alternative interpretations considered because the parties had already resolved their issues.
The Supreme Court dismissed the Transfer Petition and the Special Leave Petition as withdrawn, based on the submissions made by the counsels for the respective parties. The court’s order was brief and procedural, focusing on the settlement reached by the parties.
“Learned counsel for the parties submit that the parties have resolved their inter se disputes and the proceedings have been withdrawn pursuant to the said settlement.”
“Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that she has instructions to withdraw the Transfer Petition as well as the Special Leave Petition.”
“The Transfer Petition as well as the Special Leave Petition are, accordingly, dismissed as withdrawn.”
Key Takeaways
- ✓ Parties can resolve their disputes outside of court and withdraw pending cases.
- ✓ The Supreme Court respects and facilitates settlements reached by the parties.
- ✓ When a settlement is reached, the court may dismiss the case without going into the merits of the case.
Directions
No specific directions were given by the Supreme Court in this order.
Specific Amendments Analysis
There are no specific amendments discussed in the judgment.
Development of Law
The ratio decidendi of this case is that the Supreme Court will dismiss a case if the parties have settled their disputes and wish to withdraw their petitions. This case does not change any previous positions of law as it is a procedural order based on the settlement between the parties.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court dismissed both the Transfer Petition and the Special Leave Petition filed by Swati Chaudhary, as the parties had resolved their disputes and agreed to withdraw the proceedings. The Court’s decision underscores the importance of settlements in resolving legal disputes and the procedural aspect of withdrawing cases.