Is a daughter who was not a party to the Settlement Agreement bound by its waiver?

No. Where the Settlement Agreement was executed solely between the appellant and the respondent No.1-wife, and the respondent No.2-daughter had attained age of majority prior to its execution and was not a party to it, it cannot be said that she had waived her right to monetary claims.

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 — Divorce Act, 1869 — s.10A — Settlement Agreement — Waiver of monetary claims and maintenance — Abuse of process — Daughter not a party to the Settlement Agreement — Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 — Settlement Agreement — Monetary claims relinquished — Abuse of process — Held: Where a wife has voluntarily relinquished all monetary claims, including maintenance, revival of those claims through subsequent proceedings under the DV Act cannot be permitted; such proceedings constitute an abuse of process. (¶8) Divorce Act, 1869 — s.10A — Settlement Agreement — Plea of coercion without legal challenge — Held further: Mere averments of coercion cannot suffice absent any proceedings to set aside the decree or to seek a declaration invalidating the Settlement Agreement; parties cognizant of their rights are deemed to have executed it consciously and voluntarily. (¶11, 12) Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 — Settlement Agreement — Daughter not a party — Liberty to claim monetary relief — Held further: A daughter who had attained age of majority before the Settlement Agreement and was not a party to it cannot be said to have waived her right to monetary claims, and shall be at the liberty to initiate fresh proceedings. Appeal allowed; complaint quashed. (¶14, 15)

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of REJI BABY v. SUBI MARY & ORS — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India