THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO F.C.A.M.P.No.613 of 2009 and Family Court Appeal No.208 of 2008 F.C.A.M.P.No.613 of 2009: Between Smt. Penninti Ganga Bhavani @ Suma … Petitioner/Appellant and Penninti Venkata Ramana Murthy … Respondent/Respondent F.C.A.No.208 of 2008: Between Smt. Penninti Ganga Bhavani @ Suma … Appellant/Respondent and Penninti Venkata Ramana Murthy … Respondent/Petitioner THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO F.C.A.M.P.No.613 of 2009 and Family Court Appeal No.208 of 2008 Oral Judgment: (per D.S.R.Varma, J.) Heard Sri C.Raghu, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant-respondent and Sri P.Satyanarayana, learned Counsel, representing Smt. N(P).Anjana Devi, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent-petitioner. 2. Though the matter is listed under the caption ‘Interlocutory’, with the consent of learned Counsel, the main appeal itself is being disposed of by this judgment. 3. This appeal, under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 (for brevity ‘the Act’), is directed against the order and decree, dated 18-4-2008, in O.P.No.612 of 2005, passed by the Judge, Family Court, Visakhapatnam. 4. By the impugned order and decree, the Court below allowed the O.P., filed by the respondent herein, dissolving the marriage between the parties held on 09-02-1996. 5. The appellant herein is the respondent-wife and the respondent is the petitioner-husband in the O.P., before the Court below. 6. It is represented by the learned Counsel appearing for both the parties that during the pendency of the appeal, the parties arrived at a compromise and the matter has been settled out of the Court amicably. 7. To that effect, an application F.C.A.M.P.No.613 of 2009 has been filed by the learned Counsel appearing for the wife, under Order XXIII, Rule 3 read with Section 151 of C.P.C., duly enclosing a Compromise Petition seeking to record compromise and dispose of the appeal in terms of the said compromise without costs. 8. The said Compromise Petition contains the signatures of both the parties as well as their respective Counsel. The parties, who are also present before this Court, identified each other and they are also identified by their respective Counsel. The signatures of the parties on the Compromise Petition have been identified by each other. Upon enquiry by this Court, the parties stated that they knew the contents of the Compromise Petition and the consequences thereof. 9. It is further stated by the learned Counsel as well as the parties that by virtue of the compromise entered into, a sum of Rs.2,60,000/- (Rupees two lakhs and sixty thousand only) towards full and final settlement of all the claims of past, present and future maintenance etc., is paid to the wife by the husband by way of Manager’s Cheque bearing No.220819 dated 26-11-2009 drawn on HDFC Bank Ltd., Banjara Hills Branch, Hyderabad and the said Manager’s Cheque has been acknowledged by the wife. Hence, we do not have any reason to disbelieve the factum of compromise and the contents and the terms and conditions set out in the Compromise Petition. As a consequence to the settlement, the decree for divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 granted by the Court below is to be confirmed and accordingly the same stands confirmed. 10. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and the Compromise Petition, the application F.C.A.M.P.No.613 of 2009 is allowed and consequently and as agreed, the appeal shall stand dismissed in terms of the Compromise Petition and there shall be a decree in terms of the said Compromise Petition. No costs. 11. A copy of the Compromise Petition shall be annexed to this judgment, which shall form part of this judgment. ___________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA ____________________ JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO 02nd December, 2009. Ak