Sukhnath Oraon Aged About 35 Years Son Of ... vs Chandmani Kumari Aged About 34 Years W/O ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 4094 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Sukhnath Oraon Aged About 35 Years Son Of ... vs Chandmani Kumari Aged About 34 Years W/O ... on 19 June, 2025

Author: Sujit Narayan Prasad

Bench: Sujit Narayan Prasad, Rajesh Kumar

                                          2025:JHHC:16123-DB



 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
              F.A. No.55 of 2022
                       -----

Sukhnath Oraon aged about 35 years son of Shanicharwa Oraon aged about 35 years son of Shanicharwa Oraon, resident of village Ugra Bhagat Toli, P.O. Korambe, P.S. Senha, District Lohardaga. ... ... Appellant Versus Chandmani Kumari aged about 34 years w/o Sukhnath Oraon, D/o Ganga Oraon, resident of village Banpur, P.S. Kosko, P.O. Jori, District Lohardaga.... ... Respondent

-------

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR

-------

For the Appellant       : Mr. K.K.Ambastha, Advocate
                        : Ms. Kismanti Minz, Advocate
For the Respondent      : None
                                ------
Order No. 20/Dated 19 June, 2025
                          th

1. The instant appeal is under Section 19(1) of the

Family Courts Act directed against the judgment dated

23.05.2022 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family

Court, Lohardaga in Original Suit No. 10 of 2021 by which

the decree of divorce has been denied.

2. Mr. Kundan Kumar Ambastha, learned counsel

appearing for the appellant along with Ms. Kismanti Minz,

learned counsel on record, have submitted in course of

argument that the matter has been settled which has been

taken note by the Coordinate Bench of this Court, as has

been recorded in the order dated 08.08.2024 (Order No.11).

The aforesaid order emphatically has been prayed to be

considered.

2025:JHHC:16123-DB

3. This Court, on insistence, has gone through the

said order and found that the Coordinate Bench, after

taking into consideration a document brought on record

wherein it has been stated that the matter has amicably

been settled and a compromise petition to that effect has

also been filed, having been appended thereto at page 5 of

the supplementary affidavit, has passed the order.

4. The Coordinate Bench, on the aforesaid backdrop,

has specifically recorded in the said order "Nothing remains

to be adjudicated", for ready reference, the said order dated

08.08.2024 is being referred hereunder as :-

"Order No.11/ Dated 8th August, 2024 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. From the documents brought on record, it appears that matter has already been settled amicably and a compromise petition to that effect has also been annexed, which is at page no. 5 of the supplementary affidavit. Nothing remains to be adjudicated. However, since the parties have not appeared, both parties i.e., appellant -husband and respondent-wife are hereby directed to appear in person before the Court on the next date. Appellant-husband is directed to pay a sum of Rs. 2000/- to the respondent wife as travelling allowance, which shall either be deposited in the account of respondent-wife or shall be given physically in the Court.

3. Post this matter on 28.08.2024 at 1.30 P.M. in the chamber"

5. No application has been filed to recall the aforesaid

order.

2025:JHHC:16123-DB

6. This Court, considering the fact that nothing

remains to be adjudicated in view of the aforesaid

compromise, is of the view that the instant appeal be

disposed of.

7. Accordingly and in view of the specific recording in

the order dated 08.08.2024 that "nothing remains to be

adjudicated", the instant appeal is disposed of having

become infructuous.

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)

(Rajesh Kumar, J.) Birendra/