IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Mat Appeal No. 258 of 2006()
1. ELIZABETH @ LIZY, AGED
... Petitioner
Vs
1. DR. P.O.JOSEPH, AGED 61 YEARS,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SMT.LEKHA SURESH
For Respondent :SRI.BEPIN VIJAYAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH
The Hon'ble MR. Justice HARUN-UL-RASHID
Dated :01/04/2008
O R D E R
KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ.
----------------------------------------------------
Mat. Appeal Nos. 258 & 270 OF 2006
&
Crl. Appeal No. 664 OF 2008
-----------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 1st day of April, 2008.
J U D G M E N T
Kurian Joseph, J.
Mat.Appeal Nos.258 and 270 of 2006 are filed by the
petitioner-wife in O.P.No.331/2002 and O.P.No.487/1997
respectively on the file of the Family Court, Ernakulam.
O.P.No.331/2002 was filed praying for a decree of nullity of
marriage between the petitioner and the respondent.
O.P.No.487/1997 was filed praying for recovery of money from
the respondent. The former was dismissed and the latter was
partly allowed. Aggrieved by the same, Mat.Appeal Nos.258 and
270 of 2006 are filed at the instance of the wife.
2. During the pendency of the appeals, thanks to the
strenuous efforts for conciliation and mediation taken by
Smt. Jeena Joseph and thanks to the cooperation extended by
learned counsel appearing on both sides, and also thanks to the
whole-hearted cooperation of the parties, peace has been
purchased and the parties have decided to settle the entire
Mat.Appeal No.258/06 & conn. cases 2
disputes between them amicably. As part of the compromise as
above, the respondent-husband has handed over a cheque for an
amount of Rs.2,50,000/- in full and final settlement of the entire
claims, which has been duly received by the appellant-petitioner.
3. As part of the settlement, the parties have also filed a
petition under Section 10A of the Divorce Act. Parties were
married on 17.01.1976. However, they have been living
separately since last more than ten years. We find that the
parties are entitled to a decree of divorce on mutual consent, in
the above circumstances. It is only in the interests of the parties
and that there is no collusion. We are also satisfied that no
further lie over period is necessary.
4. Accordingly, we dissolve the marriage between the
appellant and the respondent by a decree on mutual consent.
I.A.No.888/2008 is thus allowed. Mat. Appeal Nos.258 and 270 of
2006 are disposed of as compromised. I.A.No.888/2008 will form
part of the decree. Since the parties have thus settled the entire
disputes between them, nothing survives in the Criminal Appeal
No.664/2008. The same is accordingly dismissed.
The respondent-husband submits that no mark of memory
of the unfortunate developments of one time happy memories
Mat.Appeal No.258/06 & conn. cases 3
need be left with the court and hence the documents produced
may be released to both parties. Registry is directed to return
the respective exhibits after retaining a photocopy of the same to
the parties, on a proper application. In view of the efforts taken
by the learned conciliator, we find that a reasonable
remuneration is to be paid to her. Therefore, we direct the
respondent-husband to pay an amount of Rs.5,000/- to the
conciliator.
KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE.
HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE.
smp
KURIAN JOSEPH &
HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ
Mat. Appeal Nos. 258 &
270 OF 2006
&
Crl. Appeal No. 664 OF 2008
J U D G M E N T
01.04.2008