Dismissed¶¶17

Madhuri v. Madan Lal

Jharkhand HC3 Oct 2024FA/392/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madhuri v. Madan Lal | High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi | First Appeal No. 392 of 2018 with I.A. No. 10786 of 2024 | Decided 3rd October, 2024 | Bench: Rongon Mukhopadhyay and Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, JJ. | Dissolution of marriage decree by Family Court, Jamshedpur (Original Suit No. 452 of 2013, Section 13(1)(1a)(1b) Hindu Marriage Act, 1955) | Compromise between parties during appeal; permanent alimony Rs.5,00,000/- paid by demand draft | Appeal dismissed as withdrawn; pending I.As disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Permission accorded to withdraw the appeal; appeal dismissed as withdrawn; pending I.As, if any, disposed of. ¶¶17

Madhuri Vs Madan Lal — Matrimonial and Divorce | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI First Appeal No. 392 of 2018 With I.A. No.10786 of 2024

¶2

---------

¶3

Madhuri aged about 43 years wife of Mandal Lal, daughter of Sri Asha Ram, resident of N2/26, Kadma Slope, Road no.4 P.O.+P.S.Kadma, DistrictJamshedpur (East Singhbhum), at present residing at Ramjanam Nagar, Near Shiv Mandir, Behind E.C.C. Flat, P.O. + P.S.-Kadma, District-Jamshedpur (East Singhbhum) … … Appellant

¶4

Versus

¶5

Madan Lal son of Sri Rahde Shyam resident of Life no.7, House no.213-B, Kasidih, P.O.+P.S.-Sakchi, District-Jamshedpur (East Singhbhum)

¶6

…. Respondent

¶7

---------

¶8

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

¶9

---------- For the Appellant : Mr. Rohit Agarwal, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Vishal Kumar Trivedi, Advocate -----------

¶10

21/Dated: 3^rd October, 2024

¶11

Heard Mr. Rohit Agarwal, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Mr.Vishal Kumar Trivedi, learned counsel for the respondent.

¶12

This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 11.09.2018 passed by Learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Jamshedpur (East Singhbhum) in Original Suit No. 452 of 2013, whereby and whereunder the suit preferred by the respondent herein under Section 13(1)(1a)(1b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for dissolution of marriage was allowed.

¶13

During the pendency of this appeal, the matter seems to have been compromised between the parties on the terms and conditions, which have been enumerated in paragraph 5 of I.A. No. 10786 of 2024 from which, it appears that the amount of Rs.5,00,000/- as permanent alimony has also been extended to the appellant/wife by way of a demand draft.

¶14

¶15