abs IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO. 106 OF 2008 Ranjana Prasad Gaikwad .. Appellant V/s Shahab Dadamiya Sayed .. Respondent Mrs.Manjula Rao for the appellant. Mr.A.V. Anturkar with Mr.S.B. Deshmukh for the respondent. CORAM : B.H. MARLAPALLE & D.G. KARNIK, JJ. DATE : 26TH FEBRUARY 2009 P.C. P.C. P.C. : . This appeal filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 arises from the judgment and order dated 10th December 2007 rendered by the Family Court at Mumbai in Petition No.A-1363 of 2002. The Family Court was pleased to grant a decree of divorce under Section 27(2)(i) of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 and thus dissolved the marriage between the parties forthwith. It appears that the decree of separation was passed on 17th July 2002 and the Family Court held that there was - 2 - no cohabitation between the parties after passing of the said decree of separation. 2. This appeal was heard from time to time and the parties with the assistance of their learned counsel negotiated on an amicable settlement. From the wedlock, they have a daughter by name Rasha born on 27th February 1993. She is now about 16 years of age and studying in Xth standard. The parties have been successful in settling all the marital disputes and both were keen in the same with the paramount object of their daughter’s welfare. The settlement terms have been reduced in the form of "Consent Terms". 3. The parties are present before us and they have verified the Consent Terms and signed the same along with their advocates. The appellant has given up her challenge to the decree of divorce and in turn accepted an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- to be paid by the respondent towards the full and final settlement/maintenance/ alimony to her and daughter Rasha. The respondent has agreed to pay the first instalment of Rs.2,30,000/- by a demand draft drawn in favour of the appellant within a period of 8 working days from today and he has further agreed to pay balance amount of Rs.2,70,000/- in the similar manner but within a period of 12 weeks from today. On receipt of the said amounts, the appellant - 3 - has agreed to invest them in fixed deposits in any nationalised bank in the joint account of herself and daughter Rasha. The interest accrued on the said fixed deposits would be withdrawn by her for the day to day expenses of the daughter. She has agreed to provide the certified true copies of the fixed deposits to the respondent, as and when the amounts of Rs.2,30,000/- and Rs.2,70,000/- are invested. On these conditions, the appellant has agreed to withdraw this appeal along with Civil Application No.167 of 2008. 4. We are satisfied that the terms of the settlement are in the interest of both the parties and for the welfare of their daughter Rasha. The daughter would be attaining the age of 18 years in another two years and she would be free to decide whether she would like to stay with her mother or the father. However, till she attains the age of 18, she is free to visit her father as and when she desires and the father has not insisted on her custody either exclusively or jointly. He has left it to the desire of Rasha. We note that the settlement terms shall be binding on both the parties. We also clarify that the settlement does not, in any way, affect the rights of Rasha as the daughter of the respondent or as his successor. 5. Hence, the appeal is disposed off as withdrawn - 4 - in view of the Consent Terms which are marked as "X" for identification. 6. We direct the Family Court to issue the decree of divorce in the first week of June 2009 on having satisfied with the settlement terms have fully met. 7. Writ to go to the Family Court forthwith. 8. R & P if received be returned. (D.G. KARNIK, J.) (B.H. MARLAPALLE, J.)