HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION Nos. 3099 & 3601 of 2008 COMMON ORDER: These two criminal petitions have been filed assailing the common order dated 03-03-2008 passed in Crl..P.No. 139 and 149 of 2007 on the file of the V Addl.Metropolitan Sessions Judge-Cum-Mahila Court, Hyderabad. 2. Since these two criminal petitions arose out of the common order, I deem it appropriate to dispose of them by this common order. 3. Smt. Karim Fathima is the petitioner in MC No. 13 of 2000 filed U/Sec. 2 of Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 claiming various reliefs. 4. Learned Magistrate by his order dated 31-08-2007 granted Iddat period maintenance of Rs.9,000/- for three months at the rate of Rs.3,000/- per month and Rs.50,000/- towards fair and better provision and also Rs.1,00,000/- towards goda joda and cost of Jahez list. Assailing the said order, the husband and his parents filed a revision being R.P.No. 139 of 2007 whereas the wife filed RP No. 149 of 2007 on the file of the V Addl. Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Mahila Court, Hyderabad. The Revisional court disposed of both the revisions by a common order dated 03-03-2008 enhancing the amount under fair and better provision from Rs.50,000/- to Rs.2,00,000/- while setting aside other amounts granted under different heads. Assailing the said order, husband and his parents filed Crl.P.No. 3601 of 2008 whereas wife filed Crl.P.No. 3099 of 2008. 5. Pending the petitions, both the parties entered into a compromise and filed petitions being Crl.M.P.No. 7660 of 2010 by wife and Crl.M.P.No. 7659 of 2010 by husband to modify the orders passed by the trial court as well as the revisional court restricting the maintenance amount to Iddat period which comes to Rs.9,000/-. Both the Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions are hereby ordered. 6. The relevant para of the affidavit filed by the Husband in support of the Crl.M.P.No. 7659 of 2010 reads as hereunder: “4. I submit that pending the Crl.P. 3601 /08 and Crl.P. 3099/08 before this Hon’ble High Court, the parties have entered into a compromise and settled all the disputes. Pursuant to the said settlement the 1st respondent relinquished all the claims claimed in MC 13/2000 on the file court of XIII Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad except the maintenance amount of Iddat period which comes to Rs.9,000/-. I submit that pursuant to the settlement I agreed to withdraw the criminal case in CC No. 917/09 on the file of the Court of XVI Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. I submit that both the parties intended to give quietus to the disputes. In such circumstances, it is prayed to set aside the orders passed by Learned XIII Addl.Chief Metropolitan Magistrate in MC 13/2000 dt. 31-8-2007 as modified by the common order passed by the V Addl.Metropolitan Sessions Judge, in Crl.R.P.No. 139/07 and 149/07 dt. 3-3-2008.” 7. Having regard to the fact that both the parties entered into a compromise as stated above, the order passed in MC.No. 13 of 2000 on the file of the XIII Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad and also the common order dated 03- 03-2008 passed by the learned V Addl. Metropolitan Sessions Judge in Crl.R.P.Nos. 139 & 149 of 2007 are modified restricting the maintenance to the iddat period only i.e, for three months at the rate of Rs.3,000/- per month totalling to Rs.9,000/-. 8. With the above modification, these two criminal petitions are disposed of. ____________ 19-08-2010 Mjl/*