New Delhi: Former Indian cricketer Shikhar Dhawan has secured a major legal victory after a Delhi family court ordered his ex-wife Aesha Mukherjee to return ₹5.7 crore. The court ruled that the property settlement reached in Australia was obtained through fraud and coercion, making it legally invalid.
The Patiala House Family Court observed that the marriage between Dhawan and Mukherjee was registered in India, giving Indian courts jurisdiction over the dispute. The court further clarified that divorce-related orders passed by the Australian court would not be binding in India.
FCRF Launches Flagship Certified Fraud Investigator (CFI) Program
The case was linked to a property settlement agreement under which a substantial amount was paid to Aesha Mukherjee. In his petition, Dhawan had alleged that the settlement was signed under pressure and threats, seeking cancellation of the agreement. During the hearings, the court reviewed jurisdictional issues and the circumstances under which the agreement was executed.
In its judgment, the court stated that any agreement reached through fraud, coercion, or undue influence cannot be granted legal validity. The judge emphasized that transparency and voluntary consent are essential in matrimonial settlements. The court found that evidence presented indicated that the property settlement process was not fair.
Following the verdict, Dhawan received significant relief as the court not only ordered the return of the payment but also declared certain divorce-related orders issued by the Australian court as non-enforceable in India. The court observed that foreign court orders cannot automatically be applied in matters falling under Indian jurisdiction.
During the proceedings, both sides submitted documents and legal arguments. Dhawan’s legal team claimed that he was pressured into signing the settlement, while Mukherjee’s side attempted to defend the validity of the agreement. However, the court ruled in favour of Dhawan based on the available evidence.
The decision is considered important in family law jurisprudence as it may influence future disputes involving international divorce settlements and jurisdictional conflicts. Legal experts believe that cross-border matrimonial cases require thorough scrutiny of legal frameworks and settlement procedures of both countries.
After the judgment, Dhawan’s legal team welcomed the decision, while there has been no public reaction from Aesha Mukherjee. Further legal proceedings may still be possible depending on the next course of action.
The case highlights complexities not only in sports-related personal disputes but also in international family law and property settlement matters. Experts say that clearer jurisdictional definitions in global marital relationships may help reduce such disputes in the future.
About the author — Suvedita Nath is a science student with a growing interest in cybercrime and digital safety. She writes on online activity, cyber threats, and technology-driven risks. Her work focuses on clarity, accuracy, and public awareness.
