Allowed

M.G.Saji v. Smt.Shiji.S.

Kerala HC7 Dec 2010Mat.Appeal/344/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this matrimonial appeal, the appellant husband appealed an order directing him to pay amounts to his wife. During the pendency, parties settled disputes via a mediation settlement dated 30/03/2010. The Court accepted the settlement, allowed the appeal, and set aside the impugned order.

What did the court decide?

The mediation settlement dated 30/3/10 accepted; appeal allowed; impugned order set aside; parties to suffer respective costs.

M.G.Saji Vs Smt.Shiji.S. — Maintenance and Alimony | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN

¶3

TUESDAY, THE 7TH DECEMBER 2010 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA 1932

¶4

Mat.Appeal.No. 344 of 2006() ---------------------------OP.1333/2003 of FAMILY COURT, THIRUVALLA ....................

¶5

PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT/RESPONDENT

¶6

-----------------------------------M.G.SAJI, S/O. GOPALAN, MUNDAKKOTTUVEEDU, MANAKKAYAM, CHITTAR P.O., RANNY TALUK.

¶7

BY ADV. SRI.K.RAVIKUMAR

¶8

RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER

¶9

¶10

SMT. SHIJI S., D/O. SYAMALA, NJANDUTHOTTIL VEEDU, MEENKUZHY, VAYYATTUPUZHA, CHITTAR, RANNY TALUK.

¶11

ADV. SRI.SATHISH NINAN SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW SRI.P.T.GIRIJAN[MEDIATOR]

¶12

THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

R. BASANT & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ.

¶14

------------------------------------------------Mat. Appeal No. 344 of 2006-E

¶15

------------------------------------------------Dated this the 7^th day of December, 2010

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

Basant,J.

¶18

This appeal is preferred by the appellant/husband against an impugned order under which he is directed to pay amounts to his wife. During the pendency of the appeal, parties were referred for mediation. Parties have settled their disputes. They have entered into a mediation settlement dated 30/3/10. Settlement dated 30/3/10 is duly signed by the parties and countersigned by their respective counsel. It is admitted that the document referred to in Clause (i) of the mediation settlement has already been executed. It is further submitted that the total amount of Rs.1 lakh which has to be paid/deposited in terms of Clause (ii) of the terms of settlement has already been paid/deposited. It is further submitted that the parties are

¶19

Mat. Appeal No. 344 of 2006 -: 2 :-

¶20

taking necessary steps to comply with other conditions stipulated in the mediation settlement.

¶21

It is agreed by both counsel that this appeal can now be allowed and the impugned order can be set aside, the entire claim having been settled and payment in pursuance of the settlement having been effected.

¶22

We are satisfied that the settlement between the parties can be accepted and this Mat. Appeal can now be disposed of.

¶23

In the result:

¶24

(a) The mediation settlement dated 30/3/10 between the parties is accepted. The same shall be appended to the appellate decree.

¶25

(b) This appeal is allowed.

¶26

¶27

(d) Parties shall suffer their respective costs in this appeal.

¶28

Sd/-

¶29

R. BASANT (Judge)

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

K. SURENDRA MOHAN (Judge)

¶32

Nan/ //true copy//

¶33

P.S. to Judge

M.G.Saji v. Smt.Shiji.S.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.G.Saji v. Smt.Shiji.S.

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

Anupama Vs Suseelan

Soman Vs Anitha & Others

Abdul Razack.T.K Vs Naseera.M.K

Saheer Vs Asmabi

Mini Ashok Madhav Vs Ashok Madhav

Sri.Abdu Rahiman Vs Chatheri Hussain Musaliyar & Others