THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO F.C.A.M.P.No.617 of 2009 and Family Court Appeal No.260 of 2008 F.C.A.M.P.No.617 of 2009: Between Thammareddy Chaya Devi … Petitioner/Respondent and Thammareddy Venu Pratap … Respondent/Appellant F.C.A.No.260 of 2008: Between Thammareddy Venu Pratap … Appellant and Smt. Thammareddy Chaya Devi … Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO F.C.A.M.P.No.617 of 2009 and Family Court Appeal No.260 of 2008 Oral Judgment: (per D.S.R.Varma, J.) Heard Sri C.Raghu, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant-petitioner and Sri Nimmagadda Satyanarayana, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent-respondent. 2. Though the matter is listed under the caption ‘Interlocutory’, with the consent of the learned Counsel, the main appeal itself is being disposed of by this judgment. 3. This appeal, under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 is directed against the order and decree, dated 06-10-2008, in O.P.No.14 of 2008, passed by the Judge, Family Court, Eluru, West Godavari district. 4. By the impugned order and decree, the Court below dismissed the O.P., filed by the appellant herein under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking divorce from the respondent on the ground of cruelty. 5. The appellant herein is the petitioner-husband and the respondent is the respondent-wife in the O.P., before the Court below. 6. It has been reported by the learned Counsel appearing for both the parties that during the pendency of the appeal, the parties arrived at a compromise and the matter has been settled out of the Court amicably. 7. To that effect, an application F.C.A.M.P.No.617 of 2009 has been filed by the learned Counsel for the wife, under Order XXIII, Rule 3 read with Section 151 of C.P.C., duly enclosing a Compromise Petition seeking to record the compromise and as per the said compromise, the parties agreed to have divorce with mutual consent. 8. Though there is no petition as such before this Court filed under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (‘the Act’, for brevity), we treat this petition to record compromise as the one filed under Section 13-B of the Act and pass the present order. 9. The said Compromise Petition contains the signatures of both the parties as well as their respective Counsel. The parties, who are also present before this Court, identified each other and they are also identified by their respective Counsel. The signatures of the parties on the Compromise Petition have been identified by each other. Upon enquiry, the parties further informed this Court that they are aware of the contents of the Compromise Petition and the consequences thereof. 10. It is further stated by the learned Counsel as well as the parties that pursuant to the compromise entered into, a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lakhs only) towards full and final settlement of maintenance is paid to the wife by the husband and the same has been acknowledged by the wife. 11. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, particularly in the light of the Compromise Petition, the present petition F.C.A.M.P.No.617 of 2009, which is being treated as the one filed under Section 13-B of the Act, is allowed and accordingly, the O.P., before the Court below is also allowed, setting aside the impugned order and a decree for divorce is granted dissolving the marriage between the parties held on 19-4- 2003 and consequently, the appeal is disposed of in terms of the Compromise Petition and there shall be a decree in terms of the said Compromise Petition. No costs. 12. A copy of the Compromise Petition shall be annexed to this judgment, which shall form part of this judgment. ___________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA ____________________ JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO 02nd December, 2009. Ak