IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI MONDAY, THE 7TH JUNE 2010 / 17TH JYAISTHA 1932 Mat.Appeal.No. 885 of 2008() ---------------------------- OP.1429/2006 of FAMILY COURT, PALAKKAD .................... PETITIONER(S): APPELLANT ------------------------ SUJATHA, AGED 30 YEARS, D/O.A.KRISHNAN, KUPPAMPULLIL VEEDU, PANAYUR AMSOM, POLPULLY, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.ANAND RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------- SANKARAN.T., S/O.LATE THEETHI VAIDHYAN, VALAYIL VEEDU, ARAMTHODI, MANJAPARA P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.JOHN JOSEPH(ROY) FOR R1 THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT & M.C. HARI RANI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------- Mat. Appeal No. 885 of 2008-E ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT Basant,J. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that he has no instructions. The appellant is not present. There is no representation for the appellant. The learned counsel for the respondent submits that the parties have settled their disputes. They have filed an application for divorce by mutual consent under Sec.13B of the Hindu Marriage Act. The marital tie has now been dissolved and that is why the appellant is not interested now in prosecuting this appeal, submits the counsel for the respondent. We find merit in that submission. Be that as it may, this appeal can be dismissed for non-prosecution as the learned counsel for Mat. Appeal No. 885 of 2008 -: 2 :- the appellant submits that he has no instructions. 2. This appeal is, in these circumstances, dismissed for non-prosecution. Sd/- R. BASANT (Judge) Sd/- M.C. HARI RANI (Judge) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge Mat. Appeal No. 885 of 2008 -: 3 :-