IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 13TH JANUARY 2009 / 23RD POUSHA 1930 Mat.Appeal.No. 81 of 2004() --------------------------- OP.366/2001 of FAMILY COURT,ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT. ------------------------------------ M.G.MURALEEDHARAN,AGED 51 YEARS, S/O.LATE GOPALAN KARTHA, PARVATHY NIVAS, DESOM, ALUVA 683 103, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.A.JAYASANKAR SRI.MANU GOVIND RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER. -------------------------- K.N.SAROJINI DEVI, AGED 47 YEARS, W/O.M.G.MURALEEDHARAN, SAROJ VIHAR, DESOM, ALUVA 683 103. ADVS. SRI.T.K.RADHAKRISHNAN SMT.K.L.SREEDEVI THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMAN & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. --------------------------------------------------------- MAT. APPEAL NO. 81 OF 2004 --------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT Raman J. This appeal arises out of the order of the Family Court, Ernakulam dated 29.8.2003 in O.P. No.366 of 2001. The appellant is the respondent in the said Original Petition. The Original Petition was filed for divorce on the ground of cruelty. The court below after analysing the evidence granted a decree of divorce against which this appeal is filed. 2. During the pendency of the appeal, the parties arrived at a compromise and they filed I.A. No.108 of 2009, a joint application under Section 13 B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The marriage between the parties was solemnised on 6.11.1983 and a female child was born in the wedlock who is now aged 17 years. Both the parties are Hindus. Petition for divorce was filed in 2001. The parties have not lived together ever since the filing of the petition. Thus, after filing the petition, the statutory period required before passing the order has already expired long back. Mat. Appeal No.81/2004 2 The court below passed a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty. It is now agreed that instead of a decree as sought for, a decree may be passed dissolving the marriage between the parties on mutual consent. The decree passed by the court below is, therefore, set aside and a decree is passed dissolving the marriage between the appellant and the respondent on mutual consent on the terms agreed upon by the parties. I.A. No.108 of 2009 will form part of the decree. The appeal is disposed of as above. (P.R. RAMAN) JUDGE (C.T. RAVIKUMAR) JUDGE sp/ Mat. Appeal No.81/2004 3 P.R. RAMAN & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. MAT.APPEAL NO.81/04 JUDGMENT 13th January, 2009