IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID TUESDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2008 / 17TH ASHADHA 1930 Mat.Appeal.No. 611 of 2007() ---------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 19/09/2007 IN IA.148/2007,EP.84/1999 IN OP.232/2002 of FAMILY COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER: PETITIONER/JUDGMENT DEBTOR: --------------------------------------- DANIEL WILFRED RAJ, RANI NIVAS, KALLUVARAMBU, VENKODE, VATTAPPARA, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER RESPONDENT: RESPONDENT/DECREE HOLDER: -------------------------------------- LETHA KUMARI, THERIVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, MALAYAM, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADVS. SMT.K.KUSUMAM T.H.ABDUL AZEEZ[MEDIATOR] THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------------------- MAT, APPEAL NO.611 OF 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of July, 2008 JUDGMENT Kurian Joseph, J. The appellant is the judgment debtor in O.P. No.232 of 2002 on the file of the family Court, Thiruvananthapuram. During the pendency of the said petition, interim maintenance at the rate of Rs.500/- to the respondent and Rs.300/- each to the children was granted. Litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.3,000/- was also granted. While so, execution petition was filed in 1999 claiming arrears of maintenance. In the process, the property under attachment was sold in court auction and the respondent purchased the same. The appellant filed I.A. No.148 of 2007 for setting aside the sale. That was rejected and hence this appeal. 2. During the pendency of the appeal, the appellant, respondent and their children were present before us. After lengthy discussions, the appellant agreed to settle the entire disputes between the parties. However, after some time, it appears, the appellant was not serious about the action to be taken for settling the issues. Hence, this Court was constrained to issue notice to the appellant for appropriate action in respect of such conduct. Thereupon, the appellant submitted that he was ready to Mat. Appeal No.611/2007 2 obey the agreement entered into before this Court and filed an affidavit tendering an unconditional apology for his unbecoming conduct. In the meanwhile, there was also an allegation that the appellant though agreed to settle the entire disputes, was obstructing the pathway leading to the property sold in court auction. We find that a dispute is pending before the Principal Munsiff's Court, Nedumangad as O.S. No.221 of 2008. Therefore, it will not be proper for this Court to make any observation as to whether there is obstruction or not. We find that the respondent is not a party to the said suit. It is for the respondent to pursue her grievance in appropriate proceedings before the said court. Since, the parties have agreed to settle the entire disputes between them, we dispose of this appeal accepting the unconditional apology tendered by the appellant in view of his remorseful conduct and relegating the parties to work out the settlement. Needless to say, appropriate orders will be passed by the Family Court in respect of the balance property. The parties will file a joint petition as agreed to before us within a period of three months from today. (KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE) (HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE) sp/ Mat. Appeal No.611/2007 3 KURIAN JOSEPH & HAURN-UL-RASHID, JJ. MAT.APPEAL NO.611/2007 JUDGMENT 8th July, 2008 Mat. Appeal No.611/2007 4