Kerala High Court
Praveen Ravi vs Mithu Tushar on 3 April, 2024
Author: Raja Vijayaraghavan
Bench: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ
WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 14TH CHAITHRA, 1946
MAT.APPEAL NO. 510 OF 2019
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 25.01.2019 IN OP NO.649 OF 2016 OF
FAMILY COURT, PALAKKAD
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
PRAVEEN RAVI
AGED 37 YEARS
S/O. M.K. RAVI, RADHA NIVAS, OPP. JAYALAKSHMI SCHOOL,
MARUTHUSEVA NAGAR POST, BANGALORE.
BY ADVS.
M.SASINDRAN
SRI.SATHEESHAN ALAKKADAN
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT:
MITHU TUSHAR, AGED 34 YEARS,
W/O. PRAVEEN RAVI, RESIDING AT KOLEMKOTTIL HOUSE,
PATTOLA, MANAPPADAM POST, PALAKKAD-678689.
SRI T K SANDEEP, FOR PARTY RESP.
THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON
03.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Mat. Appeal No. 510 of 2019 2
JUDGMENT
Raja Vijayaraghavan, J.
This Matrimonial Appeal is preferred challenging the judgment
dated 25.01.2019 in O.P. No. 649/2016 on the files of the Family
Court, Palakkad.
2. O.P.No.649/2016 was originally filed by the
petitioner-husband seeking dissolution of marriage. By the impugned
judgment, the learned Family Court proceeded to dismiss the
petition.
3. When the appeal was pending consideration before this
Court, based on the request made by both parties, the parties were
referred to mediation to make an attempt to resolve their disputes.
4. We are pleased to note that the parties have finally
reached an amicable settlement and they have decided to part ways.
All monetary aspects have been settled. A Memorandum of
Agreement dated 20.3.2024 executed under Section 89 of the Code
of Civil Procedure, read with Rule 24 of the Civil Procedure (Alternate
Dispute Resolution) Rules, 2008, has been placed on record.
5. We have gone through the settlement agreement and we
find that none of the terms are unlawful. Among other conditions, in
the settlement agreement, the parties have also stated that they
have unanimously agreed on their own, and without any compulsion
or persuasion, to terminate the marital relationship and to file a joint
petition for divorce under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act.
6. In the light of the agreement so executed, I.A No. 2 of
2024 has been filed seeking to waive the statutory period which was
allowed by this Court by order dated 01.04.2024. They have stated in
the application that the marriage between the parties was solemnized
on 11/9/2011, and the same has broken down irretrievably without
any scope of reunion. It is further stated that they are finding it
difficult to coexist and cohabit in harmony and have been living
separately since 2013. It is also stated that the application has been
filed with due application of mind and there is no coercion or
influence in filing the petition. We had allowed the application.
7. They have filed IA No. 3 of 2024 seeking to dissolve the
marriage between the parties on mutual consent.
8. We directed the parties to appear before us in person. We
have interacted with them to ascertain whether they have genuinely
settled their differences including alimony or any other pending
issues between the parties. They both submitted that all issues have
been settled and that they had filed the petition for divorce by mutual
consent out of their own free will and volition and there is absolutely
no chance for reconciliation and reunion. We find that Punya Praveen,
the minor daughter, is with the mother, and order of maintenance for
her has been made in clause 11 of the agreement.
9. In Amardeep Singh1, the Apex Court while considering
the grant of divorce by mutual consent by waiving the cooling of
period had occasion to observe as under:
Amardeep Singh v. Harveen Kaur (2017 (4) KHC 683)
18. Applying the above to the present situation, we are of the view
that where the Court dealing with a matter is satisfied that a case is
made out to waive the statutory period under S.13B(2), it can do so
after considering the following:
i) the statutory period of six months specified in S.13B(2), in
addition to the statutory period of one year under S.13B(1) of
separation of parties is already over before the first motion
itself;
ii) all efforts for mediation/conciliation including efforts in terms
of Order XXXII A R.3 CPC / S.23(2) of the Act / S.9 of the
Family Courts Act to reunite the parties have failed and there
is no likelihood of success in that direction by any further
efforts;
iii) the parties have genuinely settled their differences including
alimony, custody of the child or any other pending issues
between the parties;
iv) the waiting period will only prolong their agony.
10. After having carefully considered the facts of the instant case and
after interacting with the parties, we are satisfied that it would be in the interest
of both sides to put a quietus to all litigations and to save the parties from any
further agony.
In that view of the matter, this appeal is disposed of in terms of the
Memorandum of Agreement dated 20.03.2024 entered into between the parties.
The Memorandum of Agreement shall form part of this judgment. The marriage
between the parties solemnized on 11.09.2011 will stand dissolved based on
mutual consent with effect from today.
sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V,
JUDGE
sd/-
P.M.MANOJ
JUDGE
DCS
BEFORE THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT
ERNAKULAM
Praveen Ravi Appellant
Vs
Mithu Tushar, Respondent
Memorandum of agreement under section 89 of the Code of
Civil Procedure read with rule 24 of the Civil Procedure
(Alternative Dispute Resolution) rules 2008
The parties above named beg to submit as follows
The aforesaid, Mat,Appeal and Mat.Appeal No,455/2019 were referred to
mediation for resolving the dispute between the parties, in the course of
mediation, that has taken in the presence of mediator they have resolved their
dispute and have agreed to the following terms and Conditions given below;
1, The appellant and the respondent have unanimously agreed on their own
without any compulsion or persuasion of anybody else to terminate the marital
relationship and they have decided to file a joint petition for divorce under
Section 138 of Hindu Marriage Act before the High Court of Kerala,
2. In view of the settlement arrived between the parties, the
appellant/Praveen Ravi agreed to pay an amount of Rs,28,00,000/-(Rupees
twenty eight lakhs only) towards the full and final settlement of maintenance to
the respondent/Mithu Thushar.
Appellant
Praveen Ravi
W42f-
Respondent
Mithu Tushar ivf±f¥
:ct,\`J
LJla ¢,t,,v • I. ,,.' - 'rt r)i t<
ifeLJ\astatei\.icti``ai.``OnQr,!6
_`_ r^\
~H`gkno:hQ,u.rt6%f2Ko%i\a
A =E,I
3, ln view of the agreement to receive the above said amount of
Rs,28,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Eight lakhs Only) from the appellant, the
respondent / Mithu Thushar agreed that she will not make any further claim
from the appellant in future and she has asserted that the above said amount
has been received by her as full and final settlement in respect of marriage
between them and she is not entitled for any other relief from the appellant.
It is also agreed by the respondent / Mithu Thushar that she will not make any
claim of maintenance for herself, as awarded in the order dated 28.06,2018 in
M.C.No,65/2016 of Family Court, Palakkad,
4. In view of the settlement arrived between the parties, both parties had
signed the joint application for divorce and they also agreed to give evidence in
the joint application for divorce before the court.
5. In compliance of the clause 2 above the appellant herein had taken a
D,D, bearing No. 001389 dated 16.03.2024 of HDFC Bank Hennur Road Branch
Bangalore, for Rs.28,00,0000 (Rupees Twenty Eight lakhs Only) in the favour of
the respondent and the same had been handed over to the counsel for the
respondent / Mithu Thushar and the same will be given to the respondent Mithu
Thushar on the day on which the joint application for divorce will come up for
hearing.
6, The appellant/ Praveen Ravi agreed to return the gold ornaments weighing
458.04 grams to the counsel of the respondent on this day and that the
respondent/Mithu Thushar has withdrawn the entire claim made in OP 268/2016
on the files of Family Court Palakkad and its challenge in Mat,Apl 455/2019
before this Honble High Court of Kerala.
7. The respondent / Mithu Thushar on this day will handover the gold chain
(Tali and Chain) to the Counsel for Appellant / Praveen Ravi.
AppeLLant Respondent
Praveen Ravi
EEEEE= Mithu Tushar
I.I.--,.15r,11`
ifeL,+3\as{at€;it„, .„` ,.. r.
`h`H`OKh;:h?,u.rt632%°;rta!'a
tL\....
I d hit
8, The appellant/Praveen Ravi hereby handed over all the certificate, Aadhar
card, passport, Horoscope etc. of the respondent to her counsel on this day,
9. The counsel for the respondent/ Mithu Thushar shall keep the D,D,,
certificates and gold ornaments in safe custody and shall hand over the same to
the respondent / Mithu Thushar on the date of adducing evidence in the joint
application for divorce.
10. In view of the settlement arrived between the parties, the respondent /
Mithu Thushar agreed to withdraw Mat. Appeal.No.455/2019 which is now
pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala, Since the respondent / Mithu
Thushar has agreed to withdraw the above Mat Apl 455/2019, signature of 2nd
respondent Sri.M,K,Ravi is not necessary in the agreement,
11, This agreement between the parties will not in anyway affect the order of
maintenance in favour of daughter Punya Praveen and her future rights.
ln view of the aforesaid agreement entered into between the parties, the
parties pray that the above Mat, Appeal may be disposed of in terms of
aforesaid agreement.
If any of the parties have violated any of the terms and conditions in the
agreement, the other party is at a liberty to execute the same in accordance
with law'
Dated this the 20th day of March 2024.
^p::N€:\ean":awl #!]ri RI=Nph:"Tdu:h":I fu9S)i9'
Counsel for the appellant Counsel for the respondent
I:fjl*\ The above settlement agreement is authenticated by
by me.
me.
ng*¥TG=®,®9
rfusx>s±\vultcrvn
cgivd3PJ6 Wilson K,P
#g,\f,6\£9, ife L 3\a Stats i\.ie:'3`j,:.'::a.ii'i {r:;.,i! t;/`ti`ic:i.iation centre
`````` H.igh court of Kerala
Mediator
```` Koch.I-682031
