IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MA No.666 of 2009 SURENDRA KUMAR VIDYARTHI, S/O LATE RAM DEO SINGH, R/O NEW AREA IN THE LANE OF KADAM GALI, P.S.DEHRI, P.O.DALMIANAGAR, DIST-ROHTAS………………………………………APPLICANT/APPELLANT Versus RANJU DEVI W/O SURENDRA KUMAR VIDYARTHI, S/O LATE RAM DEO SINGH, R/O NEW AREA IN THE LANE OF KADAM GALI, P.S.DEHRI, P.O.DALMIANAGAR, DIST-ROHTAS AT PRESENT C/O ARBIND SINGH, R/O VILLAGE-BARAKI REGANIA, P.O. BAIRIYAN, P.S.MALI, DISTT- AURANGABAD………………………..OPPOSITE PARTY/RESPONDENT ----------- 12/ 11-Aug-2010 Heard the parties and perused the joint affidavit filed on behalf of the appellant as well as respondent of this appeal. 2. In paragraphs 2 and 3 of the joint affidavit it is stated from both the parties that the respondent-wife has agreed for a decree of divorce in favour of the appellant and such consent has been given on appellant agreeing to pay a lump sum permanent alimony of Rs.3 Lacs. A draft bearing no. 599509 issued by Punjab National Bank, Bheria (Bihar) dated 03.08.2010 for amount of Rs.3 Lacs in favour of Ranju Devi (respondent herein) has been just now handed over to Ranju Devi, the respondent who is present in Court along with the appellant. She has been identified by her counsel as well as by the appellant. 3. The parties have also agreed that the 2 respondent shall not pursue Complaint Case No. 921 of 2006 under Section 498(A) of the IPC pending in the court of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate,, Aurangabad and similarly the appellant shall not pursue the present case and appeal any further and also Cr. Revision No. 26/2010 arising out of Maintenance Case No.49 of 2006 preferred by him against the order granting maintenance to the respondent. In paragraph-2, it has been clarified by the parties that the lump sum alimony of Rs.3 Lacs shall include ad interim maintenance already granted in favour of respondent. 4. We noticed that the name of the respondent, Ranju Devi typed on the draft which has been handed over to her today has been inadvertently typed on printed portion of the format of the draft but still it is legible. The appellant has agreed that in case of any defect in encashment of this draft he shall take immediate steps to get the draft substituted by another draft from the same bank so that the payment of the money to the respondent is not delayed. 5. As a result of the aforesaid submission and 3 compromise between the parties, this appeal is allowed in terms of the compromise. The judgment and decree of the court below dated 18th December 2007 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Rohtas at Sasaram in Matrimonial Case No. 94 of 2006 are set aside and substituted by a decree for divorce and permanent alimony on the basis of consent as indicated above. This appeal is, accordingly, disposed of. 6. There shall be no order as to costs. perwez (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (Birendra Prasad Verma,J.)