IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI TUESDAY, THE 13TH JULY 2010 / 22ND ASHADHA 1932 Mat.Appeal.No. 150 of 2010(A) ---------------------------- OP.987/2006 of FAMILY COURT, ALAPPUZHA .................... APPELLANT : 1ST RESPONDENT ----------------------------- M.V.AUGUSTINE,S/O. LATE M.J. VARGHESE, MUTTUMANNIL, KOTTANGAL,MALLAPPALLY, PATHANAMTHITTA. NOW RESIDING AT KOTTURETHU COMPLEX CHENGANNUR, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.VINODKUMAR RESPONDENT : PETITIONER ------------------------- VINCY AUGUSTINE, PRAKKAT MANNATH HOUSE,KEEZHVAYIPUR P.O., MALLAPPALLY, THIRUVALLA,PATHANAMTHITTA. ADV. SRI.T.P.PRADEEP THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ********************** Mat.Appeal No.150 2010 ********************* Dated this the 13th day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. Appellant has appeared before the Court. He is represented by his counsel. The respondent has been served. She has entered appearance through counsel. The respondent is not present. 2. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant and the respondent have settled all their outstanding disputes and they are residing together now. In these circumstances the appellant does not want to prosecute this appeal, submits the learned counsel for the appellant. The learned counsel for the respondent submits that he is also informed that there has been a harmonious resumption of cohabitation. No joint statement is filed. There is no better material available before us to confirm that such a harmonious settlement has taken place. But be that as it may, we note that this appeal is only against dismissal of a petition for divorce. The appellant does not want to prosecute this appeal. We are, in Mat.Appeal No.150 2010 2 these circumstances, satisfied that the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that this appeal can be dismissed as not pressed can be accepted. 3. In the result, this appeal is dismissed as not pressed as requested by the learned counsel for the appellant. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) rtr/