Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 724 (MAD)

Charlotte Redrigues v. Nigel Rodrigues

2012-02-10

R.BANUMATHI, S.VIMALA

body2012
Judgment :- R.BANUMATHI,J 1. Being aggrieved by the order of refusal to grant decree for divorce dated 18.10.2004 made in M.O.P.No.20 of 2002 on the file of the Family Court, Pondicherry, the appellant - wife has preferred this appeal. 2. Stating that both the appellant and respondent have settled the matter, the parties have filed joint memo of compromise today i.e., on 10.2.2012. Both the appellant Charlotte Rodrigues and respondent - Nigel Rodrigues are present. The daughter - Candice Rodrigues is also present in the Court. The appellant and the Respondent have stated that they have voluntarily and willingly agreed to go for divorce by mutual consent and to that effect they also filed a joint memo. The terms of the joint memo of compromise are as follows: "a) Dissolving the marriage, which was solemnized between the Appellant and the Respondent on 28.01.1984 at Votive Shrine, Kilpauk, Chennai 600 010 by Mutual Consent. b) The Appellant and the Respondent shall not make any Claim towards either maintenance or property rights against each other. c) The Custody of minor Daughter Candice Rodrigues will be with the Appellant. d) The Respondent is entitled to see and be with his minor daughter Candice Rodrigues on the First and Third Sunday of every month and on the 24th and 31st of December every year between 10.30 A.M and 3.00 P.M at the Appellant's mother's place at Pondicherry. He is also entitled to take his daughter out for shopping, lunch, movie, etc., during such visit and bring her back to the Appellant's mother's place by 3 P.M. e) The Respondent shall pay a sum of Rs.1000/-(Rupees one Thousand only) per month towards the maintenance of his minor daughter Candice Rodrigues. g) The Respondent shall bear 50% of the educational expenses for her (minor) higher education. 3. The terms of memo of compromise dated 10.02.2012 are recorded. The judgment and decree of the trial Court declining to grant divorce is set aside and the appeal is allowed in terms of the memo of compromise dated 10.02.2012 and the marriage between the appellant and the respondent is dissolved. The memo of compromise dated 10.02.2012 shall form part of the decree. However, there is no order as to costs in this appeal. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.