Partly allowed

Ajithkumar v. Sandhya

Kerala HC9 Jul 2012Mat.Appeal/646/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two matrimonial appeals were disposed of based on a Lok Adalat settlement agreeing to mutual consent divorce, maintenance, and custody terms. One appeal was dismissed; the other was disposed of by recording satisfaction of the underlying decree.

What did the court decide?

Mat. Appeal No. 275/10 dismissed; Mat. Appeal No. 646/08 disposed of by recording satisfaction of the decree in O.P. No. 396/2007.

Ajithkumar Vs Sandhya — Child Custody and Guardianship | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN

¶4

& THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS

¶5

MONDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF JULY 2012/18TH ASHADHA 1934

¶6

Mat.Appeal.No. 646 of 2008 ( )

¶7

OP.396/2007 of FAMILY COURT, THIRUVALLA

¶8

APPELLANT/IST RESPONDENT:

¶9

AJITH KUMAR, AGED 29 YEARS, EDATHIL VEEDU, KADAPRA MURI, KADAPRA (P.O). KAIPURAM VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA TALUK.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.MVS.NAMBOOTHIRY

¶11

RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER:

¶12

SANDHYA, AGED 26 YEARS, W/O.AJITH KUMAR, SANTHOSH BHAVAN, CHETHACKAL (P.O) CHETHACKAL VILLAGE, RANNY TALUK.

¶13

BY ADV. SRI.R.GIREESH VARMA

¶14

THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09-072012, ALONG WITH MAT. APPEAL NO.275 OF 2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

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

¶16

Mat. Appeal Nos.646 of 2008 & 275 of 2010

¶17

Dated 9^th July, 2012.

¶18

J U D G M E N T

¶19

K.T.Sankaran, J.

¶20

The parties in the aforesaid two appeals are the same and the matters in dispute are interconnected. Therefore, these appeals are disposed of by this common judgment.

¶21

O.P.No.396 of 2007 on the file of the Family Court, Thiruvalla was filed by the wife against the husband and two others for recovery of the value of gold ornaments and also for realization of the money paid at the time of marriage. The Family Court partly decreed O.P.No.396 of 2007, directing the husband to pay a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- to the wife, together with interest. The husband filed Mat. Appeal No.646 of 2008, challenging that order. Mat. Appeal No.275 of 2010 is filed by the wife, challenging the judgment in O.P.(HMA) No.256 of 2008 on the file of the Family Court, Thiruvalla. The O.P. was filed by the wife under Section 13(ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act. The Family Court dismissed the petition.

¶22

The disputes between the parties were settled before the Lok Adalat organized by the Kerala High Court Legal Services Committee, Ernakulam. The terms of settlement are

¶23

Mat.Appeal Nos.646/08 & 275/10

¶24

¶25

contained in the proceedings issued by the Lok Adalat, which read as follows :

¶26

“Both parties and counsels are present. They have reported that they have decided to settle the matter. They have agreed to have a divorce on mutual consent. They have also agreed to withdraw/settle all the cases pending before lower courts as a condition of settlement. The husband Ajithkumar has agreed that he will continue to pay the maintenance to his son Akshay by remitting the said amount in the SB account of Sandhya's mother in Federal Bank, Mannamaruthy Branch in A/c.No.1559.

¶27

Both parties have further agreed that Ajithkumar will have a right to visit his son in the school where he is studying, once in a month. It has also been agreed that Ajithkumar can take his son to his house for three days each in Onam and Christmas vacations and for 15 days during the summer vacation provided his son is willing. All these occasions Ajithkumar can take custody of child with notice to Sandhya and school authorities. Barring these occasions Sandhya will have the custody of the child. If Ajithkumar has got any grievances with regard to the child he can approach the Family Court.”

¶28

It is submitted by the learned counsel that the

¶29

parties have filed an application under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Family Court. It is also submitted that

¶30

Mat.Appeal Nos.646/08 & 275/10

¶31

¶32

the Execution Petition filed by the wife was withdrawn by her.

¶33

In view of the settlement between the parties, Mat. Appeal No.275 of 2010 is dismissed and Mat. Appeal No.646 of 2008 is disposed of recording full satisfaction of the decree in O.P.No.396 of 2007 on the file of the Family Court, Thiruvalla.

¶34

Sd/-

¶35

K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE.

¶36

Sd/-

¶37

M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE.

¶38

tgs

¶39

(true copy)

Ajithkumar v. Sandhya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajithkumar v. Sandhya

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

T.Sheela Vs P.K.Balasubrahmanyan

Sajini Vs Sunil Kumar

Prathibha Vs Manoj.R.Kumble

V.Deepak Vs G.Vishnu Preethi

Mini George Vs the State of Kerala

Sulekha E.K. Vs the Director General of Police