As such [t]he rules applicable to the construction of written contracts in general are to be applied in construing a post-nuptial agreement. Such a contract must be considered as a whole, and from such examination the intent of the parties must be gathered. Such construction should be given the agreement, if possible, as will render all of its clauses harmonious, so as to carry into effect the actual purpose and intent of the parties as derived therefrom. Roberts v. Roberts, 381 So.2d 1333, 1335 (Miss.1980). Property settlement agreements are contractual obligations arising on the date of final judgment of divorce and may be specifically enforced by a chancellor if such action is necessary to effectuate the terms of the agreement. See Mount v. Mount, 624 So.2d 1001, 1005 (Miss.1993) (<HOLDING>); Jones v. Jones, 532 So.2d 574, 580
holding property settlement to be contractual obligation from date of final judgment of divorce holding that as with a promissory note when the final payment was made on a support judgment the obligation was discharged and after that date husband had no obligation that could support a modification recognizing a divorce decree which incorporates a property settlement agreement is a final and conclusive adjudication   holding that an order pending divorce is not a final judgment that creates a right of appeal holding that the trial court had authority to enforce a marital property settlement agreement that had not been incorporated into the parties final divorce decree