IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID TUESDAY, THE 2ND DECEMBER 2008 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Mat.Appeal.No. 168 of 2008() ---------------------------- AGAINST THEJUDGMENT IN OP.936/2006 FROM THE COMMON JUDGMENT DATED 03/01/2008 IN OPDIV.299/2006 AND OP.936/2006 of FAMILY COURT, KOTTAYAM AT ETTUMANOOR .................... APPELLANTS(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. CIBIN K.KURUVILA, S/O.KURUVILA KURIAN KANDAPPALLIL HOUSE, CHENGALAM KARA CHENGALAM VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. KURUVILA KURIAN, KANDAPPALLIL HOUSE CHENGALAM KARA, CHENGALAM VILLAGE KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.J.HARIKUMAR SRI.HARIKUMAR.S. RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------- PINKY, D/O.MATHEW VARGHESE VETTITHARA PADINJARETHIL HOUSE KUMBANADU P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. ADVS. MARINA JOSEPH CONCILIATOR SRI.SATHISH NINAN FOR R1 SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW FOR R1 THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/12/2008 ALONG WITH MA NO. 171 OF 2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDERN IN I.A. NO. 647 OF 2008 IN MAT. APPEAL NO. 168 OF 2008. DISMISSED 2.12.2008 Sd/-(KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sd/-(HARUN-UL-RASHD, JUDGE) KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. --------------------------------------------------------- MAT. APPEAL NOS. 168 & 171 OF 2008 --------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2008 JUDGMENT Harun-Ul-Rahid, J. The first appellant in Mat. Appeal No.168 of 2008, who is the sole appellant in Mat. Appeal No.171 of 2008 is the petitioner in O.P(Div.)No. 299 of 2006 on the file of the Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumanoor and the respondent/wife in both the appeals is the petitioner in O.P. No.936 of 2006 of the same court. O.P.(Div.) No.299 of 2006 was filed by the husband under Section 10 of the Divorce Act for a decree of divorce. O.P. No.936 of 2006 is filed by the wife for return of money and gold ornaments. By a common judgment, the Family Court dismissed the petition filed by the husband for divorce and decreed O.P. No.936 of 2006 allowing the wife to realise an amount of Rs.12,00,000/- and 418 gram of gold ornaments or its value of with interest. Hence, these appeals. 2. When the appeals came up for final hearing, we directed the Mat. Appeal Nos.168 & 171/2008 2 parties to appear before us. The parties appeared before us on more than one occasion. We had the assistance of the learned conciliator Adv. Smt. Marina Joseph. We are happy to note that the parties have agreed to settle the dispute between them. Accordingly, the parties filed a compromise petition, I.A. No.3326 of 2008 in Mat. Appeal No.168 of 2008 and I.A. No.3327 of 2008 in Mat. Appeal No.171 of 2008 which is an application under Section 10 A of the Divorce Act for a decree of divorce by mutual consent. 3. We had occasion to interact with the parties on more than one occasion. We are satisfied that the relationship between the parties has irretrievably broken and there is no chance for a reunion. We are convinced that the joint petition for divorce is filed by the parties under free will and there is no collusion between the parties in filing the same. In view of the settlement, we feel that there is no necessity to wait for the statutory lie over period and we waive the same. 4. In the circumstances, a decree of divorce is passed dissolving the marriage between the parties with effect from today. The terms of compromise recorded in I.A. No.3326 of 2008 will form part of the decree. We record our appreciation for the earnest efforts taken by the learned Mat. Appeal Nos.168 & 171/2008 3 conciliator Adv. Marina Joseph in settling the dispute between the parties. The Matrimonial Appeals are disposed of as above. (KURIAN JOSEPH) JUDGE (HARUN-UL-RASHID) JUDGE sp/ Mat. Appeal Nos.168 & 171/2008 4 KURIAN JOSEPH & HAURN-UL-RASHID, JJ. MAT.APPEAL NOS. 168 & 171/2008 JUDGMENT 2nd December, 2008 Mat. Appeal Nos.168 & 171/2008 5