- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA. FIRST APPEAL NO. 238 OF 2004. Srikrishna Nanum Salkar, Major of age, service, r/o. H. No. 179, Dangui Colony, Alto Duler, Mapusa, Bardez Goa. .......... Appellant. Versus Dilan Gajanan Pednekar @ Anuradha, major of age, r/o. H. No. 7, Dacti Chandal Pirna, Bardez Goa. .......... Respondent. Mr. V. Menezes Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Sudin Usgaonkar, Advocate with Ms. Astrid Pereir, Advocate for the respondent. Coram:-F. M. REIS, J. Date:-16th December, 2010. ORAL JUDGMENT Heard learned Counsel for the appellant and the respondent. 2. The above appeal challenges the Judgment and decree dated 29.6.2004 passed by the learned Civil Judge Senior Division, Mapusa in Matrimonial Petition no.11/2003/B whereby the petition - 2 - filed by the respondent came to be decreed in terms of prayer clauses (a), (b) and ( c) and the counter claim filed by the appellant came to be rejected. The learned Judge by impugned Judgment has interalia dissolved the marriage between the appellant and the respondent registered under entry no. 735/96 in the office of Civil Sub Registrar at Mapusa under Article 4(4) of Law of Divorce. A direction was also issued to the Civil Registrar to cancel the said entry after appeal period is over. The appellant was directed to pay maintenance of Rs.5000/- to the respondent per month within 5 days of succeeding month. The custody of the child Madhura was given to the respondent. 3. During the course of the submission advanced by learned counsel appearing for the appellant Shri V. Menezes, it was submitted that appellant does not press his appeal as far as decree granted by the trial Court of divorce between the appellant and the respondent. Consequently the divorce granted by the impugned Judgment stands confirmed. 4. During the course of the submission both the learned counsel sought for time for exploring the possibility of one tine - 3 - settlement with regards to the payment of maintenance to the respondent as well as the custody of the child. The matter was thereafter adjourned for allowing the parties to arrive at a settlement with regards to the payment of maintenance and the custody of child. When the matter was taken up for hearing today, both the counsel alongwith their respective parties were present and have filed consent terms as far as the said surviving disputes were concerned. The consent terms are duly signed by the parties alongwith their respective Counsels. The parties who are present have admitted the contents of the said consent terms. Consent terms are taken on record and marked 'X' for identification. Both the Counsel as such prayed that the impugned Judgment and decree be modified to the extent mentioned in the consent terms. 5. In view of the above, I pass the following:- O R D E R i. Appeal is partly allowed. ii. Impugned Judgment and decree dated 29.6.2004 is modified to the extent mentioned in the consent terms marked 'X' for identification. iii. Remaining relief granted in the impugned judgment - 4 - including decree for divorce is confirmed. iv. Learned Trial Judge shall take necessary steps to comply with the above consent terms. v. Appeal stands disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs. F. M. REIS, J. vn*