A matrimonial appeal against a divorce decree was disposed of upon the court accepting a compromise agreement signed by the appellant and the respondent under Order XXI Rule 3 CPC, without adjudicating substantive issues.
Appeal disposed of in terms of the compromise agreement signed by the parties.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.V.ANILKUMAR
MONDAY,THE 05TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 14TH KARTHIKA, 1940
Mat.Appeal.No. 872 of 2017
O.P(HMA) NO.1085/2014 of FAMILY COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA
DATED 20-05-2017
APPELLANT/PETITIONER
NITHYA ANAND, AGED 30 YEARS, D/O. ANAND, AYICKAL VEEDU, TEKKEPPURAM,RANNI P.O., RANNI VILLAGE, RANNI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DIST,PIN : 689 672, REPRESENTED BY THE POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER,SASIKALA, AGED 56 YEARS, W/O. ANANDAKUTTAN,AYICKAL VEEDU, TEKKEPPURAM, RANNI P.O., RANNI VILLAGE, RANNI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DIST, PIN : 689 672.
BY ADV. SRI.V.SETHUNATH
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT:
ANISH VIJAYAN, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O. VIJAYAN, ASHA BHAVAN, MUNDAPPUZHA I,RANNI P.O., RANNI VILLAGE, RANNI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DIST,PIN : 689 672.
THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Mat.Appeal.No. 872 of 2017 : 2 :
JUDGMENT
C.K.Abdul Rehim,J.
The petitioner in O.P.(HMA)No.1085/2014 on the files of the Family Court, Pathanamthitta is the appellant herein, challenging the dismissal of the said original petition which was filed seeking dissolution of the marriage between the
appellant and the respondent.
2. During pendency of the above appeal, the parties have filed I.A.No.1/2018 seeking for acceptance of a 'Compromise Agreement' entered between the parties under Order XXIII Rule 3 of C.P.C., which is signed by both the parties and their respective counsel. It is submitted on behalf of the appellant that the above appeal can be disposed of in terms of the compromise arrived between the parties.
Hence, the above appeal is hereby disposed of
Mat.Appeal.No. 872 of 2017 : 3 :
in terms of the compromise arrived between the parties. The 'Compromise Agreement' signed and produced along with I.A.No.1/2018 will form part of this judgment.
Sd/C.K.ABDUL REHIM
JUDGE
Sd/T.V.ANILKUMAR
JUDGE
Bb
[True copy]
P.A to Judge
Nithya Anand
Anish Vijayan
C.K. Abdul Rehim
T.V. Anilkumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
