Partly allowed

Abdul Salam v. Seenath

Kerala HC14 Oct 2009Mat.Appeal/216/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court accepted a joint compromise petition filed by the spouses, settled via a mediator, regarding matrimonial and related pending proceedings. Consequently, several appeals and writs were dismissed or allowed based on the settlement terms.

What did the court decide?

Matrimonial Appeal dismissed as withdrawn; Writ Petition allowed in part as per compromise; Revenue and Criminal matters dismissed as withdrawn with direction to release deposited amount to wife.

Abdul Salam Vs Seenath — Maintenance and Alimony | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH OCTOBER 2009 / 22ND ASWINA 1931

¶4

Mat.Appeal.No. 216 of 2004(E) ---------------------------OP.557/2002 of FAMILY COURT,KOZHIKODE ....................

¶5

PETITIONER : APPELLANT/RESPONDENT:

¶6

¶7

ABDUL SALAM, S/O. MOHAMMED, THODUVAYIL, NANMANDA P.O., BALUSSERY.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.A.ANTONY SMT.LEELAMMA ANTONY

¶9

RESPONDENT : PETITIONER:

¶10

¶11

SEENATH, D/O. ABDUL JABAR, THAYULLATHIL, KARIYATHANKADAVU P.O., BALUSSERI.

¶12

ADV. SRI.MANJERI SUNDERRAJ FOR R1 SRI.B.PREMNATH (E) FOR R1 SMT.K.V.RESHMI[CONCILIATOR]

¶13

THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/10/2009, ALONG WITH RPFC NO.23 OF 2007, WPC NO. 31764 OF 2007 AND CRMC NO. 856 OF 200, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ.

¶15

Mat.Appeal No.216 of 2004, Crl.M.C.No.856 of 2007, R.P.F.C No.23 of 2007 and W.P(C) No.31764 of 2007

¶16

Dated this the 14^th day of October, 2009

¶17

JUDGMENT/ORDER

¶18

BASANT, J.

¶19

Mat.Appeal No.216 of 2004, R.P.F.C No.23 of 2007 and Crl.M.C.No.856 of 2007 have all been filed by a common appellant/petitioner, ie. the husband/father. W.P(C) No.31764 of 2007 has been filed by the wife/mother against the appellant/petitioner in the other matters. Parties were referred to the Mediator and as per the compromise petition filed by the spouses, all outstanding disputes have been settled and the parties have decided to accept a harmonious settlement and not to proceed with these matters. The settlement and joint compromise statement have been arrived at before the Mediator and it is the Mediator who has submitted the said compromise petition before this Court. The said compromise is duly signed by the parties and countersigned by their respective counsel.

¶20

Mat.Appeal No.216 of 2004, Crl.M.C.No.856 of 2007, R.P.F.C No.23 of 2007

¶21

and W.P(C) No.31764 of 2007 2

¶22

We are satisfied that the said joint compromise petition arrived at in the presence of the Mediator can be accepted and these proceedings can now be disposed of. The joint compromise petition dated 06.10.09 shall be appended to this common judgment. That joint compromise statement is seen filed in Mat.Appeal No.216 of 2004 and is available in that file.

¶23

In the result:

¶24

i) The joint compromise petition dated 06.10.09 is

¶25

accepted;

¶26

ii) Consequently Mat.Appeal No.216 of 2004 is dismissed as withdrawn;

¶27

iii) W.P(C) NO.31764 of 2007 is allowed in part. Parties accept the order passed by the Family Court in O.P.No.490 of 2007, which has already been disposed of subject to the modifications/improvements referred to in para.2 of the compromise petition;

¶28

iv) R.P.F.C No.23 of 2007 is dismissed as withdrawn accepting the undertaking recorded in para.3 of the joint compromise petition that no amount shall be claimed towards past and future maintenance due as per the impugned order;

¶29

Mat.Appeal No.216 of 2004, Crl.M.C.No.856 of 2007, R.P.F.C No.23 of 2007 and W.P(C) No.31764 of 2007 3

¶30

v) Crl.M.C.No.856 of 2007 is dismissed as withdrawn

¶31

with the direction that the amount of Rs.94,500/- along with interest due, if any, deposited before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Perambra shall be released to Ms.Seenath, the wife.

¶32

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

¶33

(M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE)

¶34

rtr/-

Abdul Salam v. Seenath

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Salam v. Seenath

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C.P.Abdul Kareem Vs Fathima

Muhammed Shafi Vs Nadiya

Shajil Kumar Vs Anitha

K.R.Anil Kumar Vs Suntha Thampi

Abu Haji Vs Kadeeja

Kandoth Chalil Smitha Vs Mulloli Shayi