ORDER : 1. Mediation builds bridges of understanding, finds out options for settlement for mutual gains, searches unobvious from obvious, dives underneath a problem and digs out underlying interests of the disputing parties, preserves and maintains relationships. Mediation helps the parties to communicate in a real sense with each other. Mediation restores broken relationships and focuses on the future - Vikram Bakshi vs. Sonia Khosia, (2014) 15 SCC 80 . 2. However, this is a case in which attempt is made by one of the parties to whittle down and destroy the sanctity of mediation process. 3. The petitioner is the wife and the respondent is the husband. The petitioner had filed O.P. No. 482/2017 in the Family Court, Nedumangad for granting a decree of divorce. The respondent had filed O.P. No. 988/2017 for restitution of conjugal rights. The respondent filed O.P. (FC) No. 330/2018 before this Court alleging that the Family Court posted the cases for evidence without conducting any mediation inspite of a request made by him to refer the cases to mediation and he prayed for issuing a direction to the Family Court to refer the cases to mediation. 4. This Court directed the parties to appear before this Court on 22.06.2018. When they appeared, the matter was referred to mediation in the High Court Mediation Centre. The parties settled the disputes in the mediation. They agreed to live together forgetting past discords in their marital life. This Court disposed of the Original Petition on 22.06.2018 after recording that the memorandum of agreement between the parties shall form part of the judgment. 5. The wife has filed this petition on 20.05.2019 with a prayer for recalling the judgment of this Court in O.P. (FC) No. 330/2018 and for permitting her to proceed with the case O.P. No. 482/2017 before the Family Court. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 7. In the affidavit filed by the wife in support of the application, it is stated that the parties had lived together as husband and wife after the judgment of this Court. It is stated that on 26.12.2018, the petitioner left the matrimonial home due to high pressure and acts of cruelty done by her husband and his parents and his sister. It is stated that on 26.12.2018, the petitioner left the matrimonial home due to high pressure and acts of cruelty done by her husband and his parents and his sister. The petitioner alleges that the settlement was only a ruse adopted by her husband to avoid facing the trial of the case in the Family Court. 8. Learned counsel for both sides submitted that, subsequent to the settlement of the disputes in the mediation, the Family Court had disposed of the cases between the parties pending before it on the basis of the memorandum of settlement executed by them during the process of mediation. 9. Now, the petitioner wants to withdraw from the agreement of settlement and she wishes to proceed with the petition for divorce filed by her against the respondent before the Family Court. 10. In the affidavit filed in support of the application, the petitioner has no specific case that she executed the agreement of settlement on account of any fraud played upon her or under any other vitiating circumstances such as coercion, misrepresentation or undue influence. The agreement was signed not only by the parties but also by the counsel for them. In such circumstances, the petitioner cannot be permitted to withdraw from the settlement after the court has given approval for it and after the parties have acted upon it. 11. In Mohanan vs. Sudakshina Ramakrishnan, 2017 (3) KHC 155 : 2017 (3) KLT 254 , a learned Single Judge of this Court has held that, when the parties settled the disputes by signing an agreement, detailing the procedures to be followed to work out such settlement, certainly, that agreement is having all the characteristics of compromise in terms of Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure and no party can withdraw from it unilaterally. Once a settlement has been arrived at between the parties in relation to the matter in the suit, that concludes as far as the court concerned in relation to the dispute resolved in the settlement. The court recording the compromise is entering into a satisfaction in terms of Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the court is not merely acting upon the agreement. 12. The court recording the compromise is entering into a satisfaction in terms of Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the court is not merely acting upon the agreement. 12. After entering into a settlement through the process of mediation and after the court as well as the parties have acted upon the settlement, one of the parties cannot be permitted to unilaterally withdraw from the same. Granting permission for withdrawing from the settlement agreement, which was voluntarily signed by the parties, would destroy the sanctity of the whole process of mediation. The settlement agreement, having been signed and acted upon, is binding on the parties. A settlement agreement entered into between the parties through mediation conducted at the High Court Mediation Centre, after getting the imprimatur of the court, has got a certain solemnity attached to it. 13. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent has not honoured the settlement agreement and therefore, the petitioner is put in a position that she cannot now seek a decree of divorce against him on the ground of cruelty on the basis of the cause of action which existed before the settlement. In the affidavit filed by the petitioner, it is stated that, on 26.12.2018, she left the matrimonial house due to high pressure and acts of cruelty done by her husband and his relatives. If it is true, it gives the petitioner a fresh cause of action for filing a petition for divorce on the ground of cruelty. Sunil Kumar vs. Prasobha, 2019 (2) KHC 57 : 2019 (1) KLT 944 . 14. In the aforesaid circumstances, we find that the petition is not maintainable and it is liable to be dismissed. 15. Consequently, the petition is dismissed. No costs.