JUDGMENT 1. Instant two misc. appeals have been filed u/S.19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 against the judgment of ld. Family Court dated 30.1.2010. 2. Respondent-Rajesh Agarwal filed application seeking divorce u/S.13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, at the same time, appellant, Smt. Seema Agarwal also filed application for restitution of conjugal rights u/S.9 of the Hindu Marriage Act and the ld. family Court while granting decree of divorce filed at behest of respondent-Rajesh Agarwal, dismissed the application filed by the appellant for restoration of conjugal rights u/S.9 of the Hindu Marriage Act by the self same common judgment dated 30.1.2010, against which, instant two appeals have been filed by the appellant Seema Agarwal. 3. The facts can be noticed from the impugned judgment of the ld. family court that the marriage of the parties was solemnized on 29.1.2001 as per Hindu ritual at Jodhpur City and from this wedlock, a daughter Khushi & son Prakhar (Pulkit)) were born but because of some family disputes between the spouse which has reached to the stage where respondent husband Rajesh Agarwal filed application for seeking divorce u/S.13 of the Act and the appellant also moved application u/S.9 for restitution of conjugal rights which was decided by common judgment. 4. During the pendency of appeal, the matter was sent for mediation, at one stage it was failed but the parties thereafter jointly submitted before the Court that if they are now being sent once again for Mediation there appears a possibility of their inter se matrimonial dispute could be resolved through the process of mediation and taking note of the wishes of the parties, the matter was sent for mediation where the parties with their free consent arrive to a settlement on 4.1.2014 and was to be complied with on or before 4.2.2014. 5. It has been informed that both the parties have complied their terms and obligations on which they have mutually agreed in terms of settlement which was jointly arrived at to resolve their inter se matrimonial dispute and a written compromise duly signed & attested by witnesses & identified by their lawyers has been filed today before the Court and both the parties present in person jointly submitted that they have signed the deed of compromise with full consciousness and without any duress and with free consent keeping in view their further prospects. 6. 6. It has also been agreed by the parties that apart from present two appeals preferred by the appellant Seema Agarwal in this Court, there was one dispute pending before the ld. Family Court No.236/2013 u/S.18 and 20 of the Hindu Adoptions And Maintenance Act, 1956 and which on being agreed has been withdrawn by the appellant on 22.2.2014. 7. When the parties jointly arrived on certain terms & conditions, unless it is forbidden by law, it is always to be accepted and carried out and as there dispute is pending since 2006, this Court consider appropriate that their matrimonial dispute may finally be resolved in terms of the written compromise dated 26.2.2014 and the Dy. Registrar, Judl. is directed to modify the decree of divorce granted by the ld. Family Court in terms of compromise arrived at between the parties and one copy of the decree be made available to each of them. 8. In terms of above, both the appeals stand disposed of.Appeal disposed of. *******