THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH F.C.A.M.P.No.483 OF 2010 F.C.A.M.P.No.484 OF 2010, AND F.C.A.No.308 OF 2009 Date: 30-08-2010 Between: Dasaneni Bhargavi ……… Appellant and Dasaneni Srihari ……. Respondent THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH F.C.A.M.P.No.483 OF 2010, F.C.A.M.P.No.484 OF 2010, AND F.C.A.No.308 OF 2009 ORAL COMMON JUDGMENT: (per the HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA) F.C.A.M.P.No.483 of 2010 is fled under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for brevity “CPC”), seeking to permit the petitioner to convert the H.M.O.P.No.45 of 2009 on the file of Judge, Family Court-cum-Additional District Judge, Guntur, which was filed under Section 13 (1) (ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for brevity “the Act”), into one under Section 13-B of the Act, for grant of decree of divorce with mutual consent, while the application F.C.A.M.P.No.484 of 2010 is filed under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC, seeking to pass a decree of divorce, in terms of the memorandum of compromise. 2. The appeal F.C.A.No.308 of 2009 is directed against the order and decree, dated 17.09.2009, passed by the Judge, Family Court-cum-Additional District Judge, Guntur, dismissing the petition H.M.O.P.No.45 of 2009, filed under Section 13 (1) (ia) and (ib) of the Act, seeking to grant a decree for dissolution of marriage between the petitioner and the respondent therein. 3. The petitioner and the respondent in said the applications and the appellant and the respondent in the appeal F.C.A.No.308 of 2009 are the husband and wife, respectively. 4. For the sake of convenience, in this common judgment, the appellant and the respondent will be referred to as “the wife” and “the husband”, respectively. 5. By the impugned order, the Court below, having considered the material, including the evidence, both oral and documentary, available on record, dismissed the application H.M.O.P.No.45 of 2009, filed by the wife, seeking to grant a decree for dissolution of marriage between the parties. 6. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of both the parties submits that both the parties have entered into a compromise and settled the matter outside the Court and to that effect a joint application F.C.A.M.P.No.484 of 2010 is also filed by them, praying this Court to dispose of the Appeal in terms of the compromise entered into between them, duly enclosing the memorandum of compromise, incorporating the terms of compromise. 7. Both the parties to the Appeal, who remained present before this Court today, have identified each other as well as by their respective counsel. Further, both the parties have signed F.C.A.M.P.No.484 of 2010 and, when inquired by this Court, both the parties admitted the contents of the memorandum of compromise, their signatures on the said application and expressed their willingness to have a compromise decree, with mutual consent, and that the signatures of the parties have also been identified by the learned counsel appearing on their behalf. 8. Having regard to the fact that the matter had been settled out of Court between the parties to the present Appeal and also having regard to the memorandum of compromise, F.C.A.M.P.No.483 of 2010 is allowed, treating the H.M.O.P.No.45 of 2009, before the Court below, filed under Section 13 (1) (ia) and (ib) of the Act, as the one filed under Section 13-B of the Act, and F.C.A.M.P.No.484 of 2010, filed under Order-23 Rule-3 CPC, seeking to record compromise, is allowed, and consequently, the appeal F.C.A.No.308 of 2009 is disposed of in terms of the memorandum of compromise and there shall be a decree in terms of the memorandum of compromise. However, there shall be no order as to costs. 9. A copy of the memorandum of compromise shall be annexed to this common judgment, which shall form part of this common judgment. _____________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA _____________________ JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH 30TH AUGUST 2010 YCR