^; A. IN THE HIGH COU^T OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR ,'^iJ^i.APPEALNO^^'^'1^200^ ^ • ^>c y^^ •&<!£y APPELLANT: . / Gopal Das Manikpuri, son (Applicant No.l) of Shri Udal Das Manikpuri, age.d about 24 years, resident of Century Cement Factory Campus, Baikunth, Tehsil Tilda, District Raipur. RESPONDENT: (Applicant No.2) Smt. Manju Kaushik, wife of Shri Gopaldas Manikpur and daughter bf Shri Ashok Kaushik, aged about 23 years, resident of Kanker. APPEAL UNDERSECTION 19 OF THE FAMILY COURTS ACT. 1984 / "ci—LS—2_0£U15_Dassed_ t ^1 HI6H COURT OF CHHATTtSSARH AT B1LASPUK &^A_Na 267/2005 CORAM : Hon'ble 5hri S.R.Nayak, Chief Justice & Hon'ble Shri Dilip Raosdheb Oeshmukh, Judge ADDelJant Moplicant No.l) Respondent (ABpliCTntNoJ;) Sopal Oas Monikpuri, son of Shri Udal das Monikpuri, aged about 24 years, resident of Century Cement Foctory Campus, Baikunth, Tehsil-Titda, District- Raipur. VERSUS Smt. Momju Kcushik, Wife of Shri 6opal das Manikpur and daughter of Shri Ashok Koushik, aged about 23 years, resident of Kanker. Present: - Shri B.P.Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant. Shri Malaya Kumar Bhaduri, learned Counsel for the respondent. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 18th January, 2006) The Following order of the Court was passed by S.R.NAYAK, CJ. 1. This appeal arises out of the proceedings filed under Section- 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. (For short the 'Act'). In the joint petition filed by the appellont and respondent under Section-13 of Hindu Marriage Act., it was agreed that the husband would pay a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- . It WIQS enhanced to Rs. 3,l0,000/- in the course of procsedin9S. The Family Court had fixed thedate J.e. 28-10-2004 for payment of Rs.2,60,000/-. Out of that agreed amount fts.3,10,000/-, the appellant husbond had paid Rs.50,000/- to the respondent wife on 05-01-2004 and he was required to poiy the balance amount of Rs. 2,60,000/- on 28-10-2004. It is stated that 2. on 28-10-2004, the appellant husbond wanted to pay the balance amount by way of demand draft to the respondent wife, but,she was absent. In that view of the matter, it cppears that the Family Court issued notice to the respondent wife to appear in person before the Court and the respondent be.mg annoyed by service of notice on her, she appeared before the Family Court and submitted that she was not willing for divorce. In these circumstances, the Family Court by the impugned order dated 15-02-2005 has dismissed the Case Number- H.M.-275A-2004. Being aggrieved by the above order of the Family Court, the husband has filed this qipeal under Section-19 of the Family Court Act, 1984. 2. In response to the notice issued by the Court on 28-11-2005, both the parties appeared in person along with their counsel and they told us that the mcirrjage between them was permanently and irretrieyably broken down due toserious incompatibility between them. We nnade anxious enquires with the parties and we are satisfied that they have taken the decision for divorce keeping in mind pros and cons of their action and out of their free will and volition and not being influenced by any extraneous consideration or influence. We are satisfied •that the parties are not likely to lead a hoppy married life. Moreover, there are no issues out of the wedlock between the parties. Today, the cppeltant husband through his counsel handed over the crossed demand draft dated 11-10-2005 bearing No. 895163 for Rs. 2,60,000/- in favour of the respondent wife Sm-t. Monju Kaushik drawn on the UCO Bank, Raipur in our presence. She acknowledges the receipt of the same. <z^ <' <jL^^^—t- 3. In that view of the matter, we allow the appeal, set aside the impugned order of the Family Court impugned in •this appeal ond allow the application filed by the cppellant husband cnd the respondent wife under Section-13 of the Hindu Marriage Act ond dissolve the marriage between the parties solemnized on 20-06-2000 by decree of divorce. ^- Sd/- Chief Justice Sd/- Dilip Raosaheb Deshmukh Judge