Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 2760 (MAD)

V. Chitra v. Raja alias Ramasamy

2017-08-21

M.M.SUNDRESH, N.SATHISH KUMAR

body2017
JUDGMENT : M.M. SUNDRE SH, J. 1. This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred by the appellant, being the wife of the respondent, challenging the order passed by the Family Court in H.M.O.P.No.230 of 2014 dated 29.09.2015, by which a decree of divorce has been granted. 2. Today a joint compromise memo has been filed by the parties duly signed by them and attested by the respective counsel. The parties are also present before this Court and they reiterated the contends of the Joint Compromise Memo. 3. The Joint Compromise Memo reads as follows: "It is submitted that both the parties enter into a compromise and agree on the following terms. 1. Both the parties agrees to dissolve the marriage held on 06.03.2011 at Shri Krishnamani Kannan Marriage Hall, Dindigul and lead their life as per their own will without disturbing each other. The Appellant/Wife hereby agrees to withdraw the instant main appeal and confirm the decree passed by the learned Family Judge, Dindigul in H.M.O.P.No. 230 of 2014. 2. The Appellant/Wife shall withdraw the petition filed under the Protection of Woman from Domestic Violence Act by the Appellant/Wife against the Respondent/Husband, his parents and sisters in M.C.No. 3295/2014 which was renumbered as D.V.O.P.No.20/2015 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Dindigul, as well as the Maintenance case filed M.C.No.16/2017 seeking maintenance under Sec.125 of Cr.P.C. on the file of Family Court, Dindigul. Further, the Respondent/Husband agrees to settle the entire arrears of maintenance in Cr.M.P.No.3764 of 2014 in D.V.O.P.No.20/2015 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, to a tune of Rs.66,000/- by way of Demand Draft dated 16.08.2017 bearing No.716599 drawn at Syndicate Bank, West Car Street (Main), Dindigul. Forthwith and she undertakes that she will not file any complaint or petition under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act or the Dowry Prohibition Act or any other penal provisions. 3. The Respondent/Husband had returned all the jewels, household articles and her belongings to the Appellant/Wife and there are no other articles or jewels or other valuables remain with the Respondent/Husband. 4. The Appellant/Wife had returned all the jewels and belongings of the Respondent/Husband and there are no jewels or other valuables remain with the Appellant /Wife. Few house hold articles worth about Rs.1 lakh will be returned within three days. 5. The Respondent/Husband had paid a sum of Rs. 4. The Appellant/Wife had returned all the jewels and belongings of the Respondent/Husband and there are no jewels or other valuables remain with the Appellant /Wife. Few house hold articles worth about Rs.1 lakh will be returned within three days. 5. The Respondent/Husband had paid a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs) by way of Demand Draft dated 16.08.2017 bearing No.716596 drawn at Syndicate Bank, West Car Street (Main), Dindigul towards lifetime maintenance for the Appellant/Wife and their female child namely Dhanyashree aged 4 years. The Appellant /Wife shall not make any claim in future towards maintenance for herself and on behalf of minor child. 6. The Appellant/Wife shall nourish the minor child Dhanyashree hereafter under her care and custody. Further, the Respondent/Husband shall not claim the custody of the minor child. 7. The parties shall hereby separate from each other and shall not communicate each other in any form hereafter and shall not interfere with each others life hereafter." 4. The said Memo of compromise is recorded and this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of in terms of the Compromise Memo. The said Memo shall form part of the decree. The Fair and Decreetal order passed by the Family Court, Dindigul in H.M.O.P.No.230 of 2014 dated 29.09.2015 stand confirmed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.