IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS MONDAY, THE 27TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 5TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 28160 of 2010(R) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN IA 3330/2010 IN OPGW.437/2004 of FAMILY COURT,ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER: --------------- BEENA JAYADEVAN AGED 37 YEARS, D/O.THOMAS, RESIDING AT PUTHEPURAKKAL HOUSE, VEZHAPRAMBU, MULANTHURUTHY PO ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.A.V.JAMES SRI.P.DALBI EMMANUEL RESPONDENT: --------------- ROY MATHEW AGED 44 YEARS, S/O.MATHEW JOSEPH, RESIDING AT KANJIRATHUNKAL HOUSE, ILLAKKAL PO, CHITHIRAPURAM , IDUKKI DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.B.SAJEEV KUMAR FOR R1 SRI.M.K.THANKAPPAN FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. *********************** W.P(C) No.28160 of 2010 ***************************** Dated this the 27th day of September, 2010 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. The learned counsel for the petitioner/mother of the child prays that this Writ Petition may now be dismissed as withdrawn. The contestants are divorced spouses. The bone of contention now is a male child born to them, now aged 14 years. The child was in the custody of the father and was handed over to the mother. According to the petitioner/mother, the child was unwilling to return to the father and it was, in these circumstances, that she filed this Writ Petition against the direction of the court below to produce the child for being returned to the father. Subsequently, it is submitted that the child has agreed to return to the respondent/father and has already returned actually to the respondent/father. It is admitted by both counsel that the child is now with the respondent/father. 2. We do, in these circumstances, note that the prayer of the petitioner that this Writ Petition may be dismissed as withdrawn (as unnecessary) now is perfectly justified. W.P(C) No.28160 of 2010 2 3. This Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn. 4. The learned counsel for the respondent/father submits that the petitioner attempts to assert that there is a subsequent harmonious settlement of the disputes. The respondent does not accept the same. Be that as it may, the respondent shall be at liberty to urge before appropriate courts that there is no such settlement and the settlement if any relied on by the petitioner is not binding on him. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE) rtr/