Allowed

K.Viswanathan v. L.Saraswathy

Kerala HC5 Jul 2012Mat.Appeal/592/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment disposed of three connected matrimonial appeals entered under para. The Court allowed the divorce application filed under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act based on a mediated settlement. Other appeals were disposed of or dismissed in accordance with the memorandum of mediation settlement agreement reached by the parties.

What did the court decide?

The marriage between K. Viswanathan and L. Saraswathy is dissolved by a decree of divorce with effect from today, allowing the application filed under Section 13-B.

K.Viswanathan Vs L.Saraswathy — Matrimonial and Divorce | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JULY 2012/14TH ASHADHA 1934

¶5

Mat.Appeal.No. 592 of 2008 ( ) -----------------------------OP.447/2002 of FAMILY COURT,TRIVANDRUM

¶6

APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN OP 447/2002-FAMILY COURT, :

¶7

K.VISWANATHAN, S/O.NELLAI T.V.KRISHNAMURTHY, AGED 56 YEARS STAFF ARTIST, ALL INDIA RADIO, KOZHIKODE KERALA STATE:

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.B.KRISHNAN

¶9

SRI.R.PARTHASARATHY

¶10

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT IN OP 447/2002-FAMILY COURT, :

¶11

L.SARASWATHY, D/O.LAKSHMI, AGED 51 YEARS HOUSEWIFE, THANKAECHIMADAM, NAVAIKULAM KALLAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶12

BY ADV. SRI.M.P.RAMNATH

¶13

THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05-07-2012, ALONG WITH MA. 614 & 733/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

K.T.SANKARAN & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS JJ.,

¶15

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mat. Appeal Nos.592, 614 and 733 of 2008

¶16

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

¶17

Dated this the 5^th day of July, 2012

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

K.T. Sankaran J.,

¶20

In all these appeals, the parties are common and the disputes are inter connected. Therefore, these Mat. Appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment.

¶21

Hereinafter the parties are referred to as 'the husband' and

¶22

'the wife'.

¶23

Mat. Appeal No.592 of 2008 arises out of O.P. No.447 of

¶24

2002 on the file of the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram. That O.P. was filed by the husband for divorce. The Family Court dismissed the O.P., which is challenged in Mat. Appeal No.592 of 2008.

¶25

The wife and minor son filed O.S. No.468 of 2000 on the file of the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram against the husband

¶26

:2:

¶27

Mat. Appeal Nos.592, 624 & 733/08

¶28

claiming enhancement of maintenance. A decree was granted in

¶29

that case in favour of the wife and minor son. Challenging the judgment of the Family Court, the husband filed Mat. Appeal No.614 of 2008.

¶30

The wife filed O.S. No.118 of 1995 against her husband and mother-in-law for return of gold ornaments and house hold articles. The Family Court dismissed that O.S., which is under challenge in Mat. Appeal No.733 of 2008, filed by the wife.

¶31

The parties were referred for mediation. A memorandum of mediation settlement agreement dated 15.12.2011 was signed by the parties and their counsel. The minor son had attained majority by that time and he also put his signature in that compromise. The terms of memorandum of mediation settlement agreement, are the following:

¶32

i. The appellant in Mat. Appeal No.614 of 2008 and Mat. 592 of 2008 is the husband and the 1^st respondent in Mat. Appeal No.614 of 2008 and Mat. Appeal No.592 of 2008 (Appellant in Mat. Appeal No.733 of 2008) is the wife and the 2^nd respondent in Mat. Appeal No.614 of 2008 is their son.

¶33

Mat. Appeal Nos.592, 624 & 733/08

¶34

:3:

¶35

ii. The respondents in Mat. Appeal No.614 of 2008 arising out of O.S. No.468 of 2000 Family Court, Trivandrum and the appellant in Mat. Appeal No.733 of 2008 arising out of O.S. No.118 of 1995 Family Court, Trivandrum have decided to settle all their claims for maintenance including future maintenance, value of gold, silver and house hold articles for a consolidated sum of Rs.5,50,000/- (Rupees five lakhs fifty thousand only). They will have no further claims in respect of decrees already passed or any future claims thereafter on the payment of the above entire amount.

¶36

iii. The respondent in Mat. Appeal 592 of 2008 arising out of O.P. No.447 of 2002 has agreed to jointly file application for divorce by mutual consent under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, with the appellant therein on 21.12.2011, on which day the appellant in Mat. Appeal 592 of 2008 shall pay a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- (Rupees Two lakhs fifty thousand only) to the respondent therein. This payment shall be part of the told amount payable of Rs.5,50,000/-

¶37

iv. Thereafter on the completion of six months period, i.e., 22.6.2012, the appellant in Mat. Appeal 592 of 2008 shall pay the balance amount of Rs.3,00,000/-

¶38

Mat. Appeal Nos.592, 624 & 733/08

¶39

:4:

¶40

(Rupees three lakhs only) to the respondent therein. On such payment the respondent in mat. Appeal 592 of 2008 shall have no objection in passing final orders on the Section 13-B petition.

¶41

v. In the event of balance amount of Rs.3,00,000/not being paid by the appellant in Mat. Appeal No.592 of 2008 as agreed above, the respondent therein shall be permitted to appropriate the 1^st installment payable of Rs.2,50,000/- towards the maintenance claims of herself and their son, as per earlier decrees and balance amount due if any can be recovered and future claims for maintenance can be levied.

¶42

vi. In the event of the respondent Mat. Appeal 592/08 retracting from the joint divorce petition under Section13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, in spite of the appellant being ready to pay the balance amount as agreed above, it shall be deemed the respondent has relinquished all her claims and the respondent shall not have the right to stake any claims for any amount as maintenance, past, present or future, or raise any claims for any movables or value thereof, against the appellant.

¶43

vi. On complying with the aforesaid terms and conditions by the parties to the above settlement the above Mat. Appeals may be disposed of appropriately.”

¶44

Mat. Appeal Nos.592, 624 & 733/08

¶45

:5:

¶46

In terms of the settlement, the husband and wife filed I.A.

¶47

No.3389 of 2011 under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act on 21.12.2011. A Division Bench of this Court directed to post I.A. No.3389 of 2011 on 5.7.2012, i.e., after a period of six months from the date of filing the application under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act.

¶48

The parties are present today. They have filed affidavits and reiterated the facts stated in I.A. No.3389 of 2011. They stated that there is no collusion between them in filing the application or in prosecuting the same. We are satisfied that the application under

¶49

Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act is liable to be allowed.

¶50

Accordingly the Mat. Appeals are disposed of as follows:

¶51

(a) Mat. Appeal No.592 of 2008 is disposed of allowing the

¶52

application filed by the husband and wife under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act. The marriage between K. Viswanathan and

¶53

L. Saraswathy is hereby dissolved, by a decree of divorce, with effect from today.

¶54

Mat. Appeal Nos.592, 624 & 733/08

¶55

:6:

¶56

(b) Mat. Appeal No.614 of 2008 is disposed of in terms of the

¶57

memorandum of mediation settlement agreement dated 15.12.2011. Accordingly full satisfaction is recorded in O.S. No.468 of 2000 on the file of Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram.

¶58

¶59

appellant, in view of the terms of settlement arrived at between the parties. Accordingly Mat. Appeal No.733 of 2008 is dismissed as

not pressed.

Sd/

K.T. SANKARAN,

(JUDGE)

Sd/

M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, (JUDGE)

¶66

dl/

K.Viswanathan v. L.Saraswathy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Viswanathan v. L.Saraswathy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sajeev Muhammed Vs Sabeena M.S.

Vijayan Vs the Superintendent of Police

Ushadevi Kumari Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

Asharaf Vs Cheriyamoideenkanakath Mariyamu

Ramesh Vs Vidyanandan

Shahida Beevi Vs Saifudeen