BEFORE THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CHHATTISGARH) „, . . F.A. (M) N0. t9^ / 2010 Apjs^llant "^: R^spondent ..^%' ^•^" ^ ^Mrs. Archana Rajimwale, W/o ayA'ZZY/^ Sandeep Rajimwale^C/o Prashant Fadnawis, in the house of Dewangan, Kailash Nagar, Near Manch Gali No.4, Kawardha, Distt. Kabirdham (C.G.) VERSUS Vasudeo Rejimwale, S/o Shri Vasudeo Rajimwale, aged about 41 years, Occupation- Government service, R/o Near Hanuman Temple, Tatyapara, Raipur (C.G.) ^^Ml,^ '^ ^- "- -s."'^ MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL UNDER SE^TION 20 OF TIIB JLUYtASRIAGE ACT. 15fl)o^')k4t^l ^IINrfL :\'tL/^ '"•^: ,^;^ tl v-^] •y ^:7^.^' ^^ ^gs^^g ^ AoDetlant Resoondwit HI6H COURT OF CHHATHS^ARH AT 8ILASPUR &IVISION BENCH: HON'BLE MR. I.M.QUDt)USI & HON'BLE MR. 6.MINHAJU&&IN. JJ F.A. (M).No. 120/2010 Mrs. Arcd'iana tajimwite Vs Scndeep Vasudeo Rajimwde Pn&sents Mr. Sudhir Verma, Advoeatc for th»d^pellant, Mr. P.R. Patankar, Advocate fpr -tfie re^ondent, OR&CRfOron ^9th June, 2011) I.M. Ouddusi. J; 1. Heard. 2. The appellant had ftted this miscellaneovs qapeal flgainst •riie Judgmcnt <& decree dated 27.7.2010 passed by the teamed 1st Actditional Pi*inc^)0tl Judge, Family Court, Raipur in Civil Suit No.24-A/2010 allowing application of the respondent herein filed under Section 13 of the Hindu f^wriaQe Act, 1955 for grant of decree of dissolution of marriage selemniaBcl betwwen liie appellant and the respondtent herein on 06.05.2001 wNfi a dinection to refund stridhcn received <it The time of marriage by •riie re^ionctent herein. 3. Brief facts of the case are that in Ifie yeoir 2009 the rc^iondent herein has fited an cpplication before liie Pamily Court below seekir»3 dissolution of marriage solemnizcd between the oppeltant ond 1<ie pespondeaiit herein on 6.5.2001 on the 9round that since the year 2Q04-QQ, without any rhyme or reason, the oppellant herein is living separately. The Court below vide impu9ned judgment allowed o^plication of the re^»ondent herein and granted decree of dissolution of marrioge in favour of -Nie respendent herein. 8ein9 aggrieved by the said judgment A decree theappcllant had preferred the fristant cyi^al. 4. On the request of leamed counscl for the parties end cwisidering the chances vf amicable settlement between the part-ies, as per provisions of Section 89 of the CPC, vide order dated 19.7.2010 the matter was referre^ to the Mediation Centre where the parties have amieably settted their ^•w"^^"-^> ^ <f£j^1 ';%. ;tpiti^ i'^/ \^/ disputes and differences ond the «ime has been reduced in writing vlde agreement dated 15,6.2011, as reported by the Secretary, Cammittee for Monitoring Ihe Mediation Center, The agre^ment ctated 18,6.2011 hasbeeyn signed by -Hie parties and Mediator Shri Y.C. Sharina. Terms of the agreement reads thus;- 1. Both -Hie parties will reside separatety orid •riwir matrimorual relation now comes to the end and thejr rekitton now being treated os a divorced hereinaftBr; 2. Shri Sandeep Vasudev Rajimwwile will pay Rs.2,90,000/- towards finalatimony to Smt. Archana by way of demand dratt befare the Hon'bte Division Bench of Hi9h Court of Chhattisgarh on Ihe next dote of hearing in first Appeal FA (M) No.120/2010. 3. First Appeal FA (M) No.120/2010 filcd by Smt. Archana and case of mairatenance pending before J.M.F.C. Kawordto bearing AAJC No.42/2011 will be disposed off in cccordance willi the order passed by Hon'fale High Courl- on lieu of this setttement. 4. Both the parties now reside iseparoEtely omd they will n®tcreate any inconvenience against each other to distyrb their peace. 5. 8oth the parties will hereinaftar rwt file, institLrt'e, lodge wiy civil aiit, application, complaint agtunst each o-riier." 5. Today, bo1+i the parties i.e. 1+ie ap|»llantand the re^ondent are present m person along with their respective counsel vi^o identifiad theni. Terms of the a9reement were shown to the parties artd 1fiey have agreed before l+iis Court that they have arrived at Itie srttlement, terms of whidh ar^ mentioned in the agreement dated t5.6<20ll. They have <xlw verified their signatures on the agreement. 6. In view of the above, the impuyied jud9ment and decrec ctated 27.7^010 te modified to the extent that marria9e between 1+ie parties is dlissolved pursuant to conditions mentioned in the setttetnent/agreement dated 19.6.2011 arrived at between the parties. Acconilingly, the Additionat Registrar (Judl) Js directed to drow the decree fortnmgogreement dated 15.6.2011 as part of it. ^:1,!^-^^, :;I ...^ ^ ^ .;r|;,,lpil .0} 7. It is pertinent to mention herc 1+iat pursyont to Clause No.2 of the G9reement wherein it has been mentioned that the re^onderrt" hcrein ^idl pay Rs.2,50,000/- to the appellant herein, the respondent-Sande^p Vasudeo Rajimwale has handed oyer a demand draft No.368201 ctatcd 27.6.2011 drawn on Oriental Bank of Commerce amounting to fts.2,50,000/- to •riie oppellant-Smt Archana, who acknowled^d receipt of the same. Xerox copy of the said demand draft has been produced before 1tiis CcNurt/which shaU be kept in the record of -riiis appeal. 8. No order as to costs. 9. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- G. Minhajuddin Judge