High Court for State of TelanganaFCA/82/2009compromise

M.Archana v. M.Sai Prakash

2018-08-06Abhinand Kumar Shavili,Suresh Kumar Kait2 pages

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT & HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI I.A.No. 1 of 2018 in F.C.A. No. 82 of 2009 & F.C.A.No. 82 of 2009 JUDGMENT:- (ORAL) (Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Suresh Kumar Kait) This appeal is preferred against the order dated 12.01.2009 in F.C.O.P.No. 388 of 2007 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Secunderabad, whereby the petition filed the respondent herein under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, has been allowed dissolving the marriage of the appellant and the respondent performed on 06.05.2004. The present application is filed seeking to dispose of the appeal in terms of the Compromise Memo dated 06.12.2017 filed by the parties.

During pendency of the appeal, the appellant and the respondent have entered into compromise whereby the appellant-wife received the amounts from the respondenthusband as agreed in the compromise memo, and thus, the parties have no objection if the order passed by the trial Court is confirmed and the present appeal is disposed of in terms of the compromise.

The appellant is personally present in the Court with her counsel, Sri D.Venkat Reddy. For her identification, she has shown her Aadhaar Card No. 807610611628 issued by the

SKK,J & AKS,J FCA_82_2009 Government of India and submits that she does not want to press this appeal and the order passed by the trial Court may be confirmed. Original Aadhaar Card is seen and returned to the appellant.

Keeping in view the terms and conditions of the compromise, and both the parties have resolved their disputes and the appellant has received permanent alimony from the respondent, we hereby confirm the order dated 12.01.2009 in F.C.O.P.No. 388 of 2007 passed by the Judge, Family Court, Secunderabad.

Hence, I.A.No.1 of 2018 is allowed. Consequently, F.C.A.No. 82 of 2009 is disposed of in terms of the Compromise Memo dated 06.12.2017 filed by the parties. No order as to costs.

As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending, shall stand disposed of as infructuous.

_____________________ SURESH KUMAR KAIT, J 06.08.2018 _________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J bcj