JUDGMENT : U.C. Dhyani, J. (Oral) 1. By means of present recall application being MCC No. 359/2015, the respondent no. 4 (review-applicant) seeks that the order dated 11.08.2014 passed by this Court may kindly be recalled and the writ petition be heard on its merits. The said application is supported by the affidavit of Smt. Reeta. 2. The main grounds, which have been given in the affidavit are being reproduced herein below for ready reference: i. Unfortunately the petitioners did not come to the house nor discharge his matrimonial obligations and left the petitioner alone without providing her any basic amenities including food, cloths and other basic needs and did not take care of applicant / respondent no. 4 at all causing grave mental and physical and financial hardship to the applicant/respondent no. 4. ii. In addition to this, the mother of the petitioner also started hurling abuses, taunting and harassing her in one way or another and the deponent/applicant was kept in her strict custody. iii. The deponent was living 400 kilometers away from his parental home, but the petitioners did not take care at all causing grate deterioration in her physical and mental health and she some how manage to call her parents and ultimately she was forced to leave the matrimonial house under pressure and torture. 3. It will also be appropriate to reproduce herein order passed by this Court in WPCRL No. 518/2014: “Án FIR was lodged against the petitioner and others for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504, 506, 498A IPC and Section ¾ Dowry Prohibition Act. Petitioner is the husband of respondent no. 4. The dispute was referred to Mediation Centre of this Court for reconciliation. Learned Incharge, Mediation Centre of this Court has submitted a report that the mediation has succeeded. The terms of settlement are finalized in the form of Annexure-A, which bears the signatures of husband, wife and their parents. The terms of settlement have also been endorsed by learned counsel for the parties, as also Incharge, Mediation Centre. Since the parties have settled their disputes amicably, therefore, the FIR lodged by respondent no. 4 against the petitioner is quashed. Annexure-A is made part of this order”. 4. Unfortunately, the scope of recall application is very limited. There is no error apparent on the face of record and therefore recall application is not found to be maintainable. 5. Since the parties have settled their disputes amicably, therefore, the FIR lodged by respondent no. 4 against the petitioner is quashed. Annexure-A is made part of this order”. 4. Unfortunately, the scope of recall application is very limited. There is no error apparent on the face of record and therefore recall application is not found to be maintainable. 5. The same will, however, not stop the review-applicant to seek appropriate remedy before the appropriate forum. 6. MCC No. 359/2015 thus stands disposed of.