Sreeraj vs Sreeraj
2021 Latest Caselaw 2634 Ker

Mat.A.No.482 OF 2020                   1


             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

                                   &

                THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS

     FRIDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 2ND MAGHA, 1942

                       Mat.Appeal.No.482 OF 2020

    AGAINST THE ORDER IN OP(G&W)NO. 565/2019 OF FAMILY COURT,
                           KATTAPPANA


APPELLANT/RESPONDENT:

              SREERAJ
              AGED 36 YEARS
              S/O. SASIDHARAN, MAVARAYIL HOUSE,
              KARUNAPURAM P.O., KARUNAPURAM VILLAGE,
              UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT

              BY ADVS.
              SMT.K.S.HASEENA
              SMT.G.GIGIMOL
              SHRI.JOSEPH T.

RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:

              JYOTHISHA.C.J, AGED 28 YEARS,
              D/O. JANDHANAN, CHERUVILAPUTHENVEEDU,
              RAMAKKALMEDU P.O., KURUVIKKANAM, KARUNAPURAM
              VILLAGE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK,
              IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 552

              R1 BY ADV. SMT.M.KABANI DINESH
              R1 BY ADV. SMT.PRIYANKA SEBASTIAN

     THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
22.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 Mat.A.No.482 OF 2020                    2




                                    JUDGMENT

Dated this the 22nd day of January 2021

A.Muhamed Mustaque, J

This Mat.Appeal is filed challenging the order in

O.P(G&W) No.565/2019 on the file of the Family Court,

Kattappana. As seen from the order itself, the order is a

consent order based on a compromise entered into between

the parties. It was before the Counsellor, the parties entered

into an agreement. The order is as follows:

"Both parties absent, represented. Counsellor's Report filed along with an agreement between the parties. The compromise is recorded. The original petition is allowed in terms of the compromise, which shall form part of the decree."

2. There is a statutory bar in challenging a

compromise order under Section 19(2) of the Family Courts

Act, 1984. Section 19(2) of the Family Courts Act says that no

appeal shall lie from a decree or order passed by the Family

Court with the consent of the parties.

In the light of the statutory bar, we dismiss the

Mat.Appeal.

Sd/-

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

JUDGE

Sd/-

C.S.DIAS

JUDGE

ab