High Court of KeralaRPFC/322/2014dismissed as withdrawn

Muneer v. Asmila

2015-05-28Honourable Mr.Justice K.Harilal3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.HARILAL THURSDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF MAY 2015/7TH JYAISHTA, 1937 RPFC.No. 322 of 2014 --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN MC 86/2013 of FAMILY COURT, KALPETTA DATED 22-05-2014.

REVISION PETITIONER(S)/RESPONDENT :

------------------------------------ MUNEER, AGED 27 YEARS, S/O. SOOPY, PUTHENPURA HOUSE, PARIYARAMUKKU, THARUVANA P.O., PORUNNANORE, MANANTHAVADY, WAYANAD.

BY ADV. SRI.JESWIN P.VARGHESE RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONERS :

----------------------------

1. ASMILA, AGED 20 YEARS, D/O. AHMMED, ARAKKA HOUSE, THARUVANA P.O., PORUNNANORE, MANANTHAVADY, WAYANAD-670 645.

2. MUHAMMED AFNAS (MINOR), REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER ASMILA, ARAKKA HOUSE, THARUVANA P.O., PORUNNANORE, MANANTHAVADY WAYANAD-670 645.

3. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.

R1-R2 BY ADV. SMT.CELINE JOSEPH R3 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. MADHU BEN THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28-05-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

K. HARILAL, J.

------------------------------------------------------ R.P.(FC) No.322 of 2014 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 28th day of May, 2015

ORDER

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the entire disputes between the petitioner and the 1st respondent, including the right of maintenance under Sec.125 of the Cr.P.C., is settled between the parties and they have agreed to withdraw all the proceedings pending before the courts in connection with the matrimonial disputes.

2. The learned counsel for the 1st respondent submits that the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is correct and the maintenance claim has been settled finally and the 1st respondent had received the entire claim in lump sum

R.P.(FC) No.322 of 2014 -: 2 :- from the petitioner.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner further sought for permission to withdraw this revision petition, in view of the final settlement of disputes between the parties. The learned counsel for the 1st respondent also agrees with the said submission, in view of the consensus arrived at.

4. In view of the above submissions, the petitioner is allowed to withdraw this revision petition. This revision petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- (K. HARILAL, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge