SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

J. Muhammed Jaffar vs J. Muhammed Jaffar on 12 April, 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF APRIL 2019 / 22ND CHAITHRA, 1941

RPFC.No. 410 of 2018
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 29.05.2018 IN MC 108/2016 OF FAMILY COURT,
PALAKKAD

PETITIONER/RESPONDENT:

J. MUHAMMED JAFFAR
S/O.JAILAVUDHEEN, AGED 32, PATTANI THERUVU,
THATHAMANGALAM, CHITTUR, PALAKKAD.

BY ADV. SAJAN VARGHEESE K.

RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS

1 RESHMA
D/O.ABDULRAF, AGED 29, 17-862, METTUPALAYAM STREET,
PALAKKA-678 001.

2 MUHAMMED AMEER(MINOR)
S/O.RESHMA, AGED 5, 17/862, METTUPALAYAM STREET,
PALAKKAD 678001
REP.BY GUARDIAN/MOTHER, RESHMA, D/O.ABDULRAF,
AGED 29, 17/862, METTUPALAYAM STREET,
PALAKKAD-678 001.

BY ADVS.
SRI.SAIJO HASSAN
SMT.J.KASTHURI
SMT.P.PARVATHY
SMT.SURYA P SHAJI
SRI.BENOJ C AUGUSTIN
SRI.RAFEEK. V.K.
SRI.U.M.HASSAN

THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
12.04.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
R.P.(FC)No.410 of 2018
2

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

R.P.(F.C)No.410 of 2018

Dated this the 12th day of April, 2019

ORDER

The prayer in the above R.P(F.C) is as follows:

“set aside the order dated 29.05.2018 passed in MC
No.108/2016 on the file of Family Court, Palakkad and dismiss
the said petition, with cost to the rev. petitioner.”

2. Heard Sri.K.Sajan Vargheese, learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner (husband) and Sri.Saijo Hassan, learned counsel appearing for

the respondents (wife and child).

3. On the request of both sides, this Court had referred the parties

to settle the disputes through mediation process conducted by the

Mediation Centre attached to this Court. It is now submitted by both sides

that the mediator has made a comprehensive mediation process not only

the matter in this R.P(F.C), which arises out of maintenance claim, but also

in respect of other litigative proceedings pending between the process.

Now the Mediation Centre attached to this Court has filed their report

dated 04.04.2019 stating that the mediation process is successful and the

mediation agreement dated 04.04.2019 signed by the parties and the
R.P.(FC)No.410 of 2018
3

respective advocates are also be made available for the perusal of this

Court. The said mediation agreement dated 04.04.2019 entered into by the

parties through the Mediation Centre attached to this Court reads as

follows:

“The Revision petitioner and the 1 st respondent are husband and wife
married under Muslim law. Both the parties decided to settle their entire
dispute under the following terms;

1. It is admitted by the 1st respondent that she had received and
amount of Rs.8,50,000/- (Rupees Eight lakhs fifty thousand only)
against full and final settlement of the entire claims including
return of gold ornaments and maintenance to her and to her son.
She also admitted that out of the said amount she will make fixed
deposit of Rs.3,00,000/- in the name of her son for meeting his
future expenses. It is also made clear that the interest will be
received by the 1st respondent for the welfare of the 2nd respondent

2. Both the parties decided to withdraw the attachment proceedings
in I.A.No.1523/2016 in O.P.No.661/2016 on the file of Family
Court, Palakkad and the 1st respondent agreed to do the necessary
proceedings to lift the said attachment.

3. The 1st respondent agreed that she had received the entire movables
back from the Revision petitioners house.

4. Both the parties agreed to execute divorce under the Munslim law.

Accordingly the Revision petitioner had made two Thalaq today at
Mediation centre, High court, Ernakulam in front of two witnesses
named 1.Mohammed Shafeek, S/o.Jailabdeen and 2.F.Shaik
Naizar, S/o.Shaik Farreed. Moreover the Revision petitioner
agreed to execute the 3 rd Talaq within one month from the copy of
the judgment received and inform the respondents Masjid in
accordance with Muslim law.

5. The 1st respondent agreed to withdraw the case of 498A filed by her
before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chittoor as per
Case No.CC No.923/2016 within one month from the copy of the
judgment received.

6. Based on the above mentioned terms and conditions both the
parties decided to settle the entire disputes between them.”

R.P.(FC)No.410 of 2018
4

4. Now it is submitted by Sri.Saijo Hassan, learned counsel

appearing for the respondents (wife and child) that the respondents have

already received an amount of Rs.8,50,000/- (Rupees Eight lakhs fifty

thousand only) against full and final settlement of the entire claims

including return of gold ornaments and maintenance to her and to her son

and that she has also agreed to put a fixed deposit to utilize the amount of

Rs.3 lakhs out of the abovesaid amount of Rs.8.5 lakhs and to put the same

as a fixed deposit in the name of the 2 nd respondent minor son for meeting

his future expenses and that the interest thereon will be received by the

1st respondent, for the welfare of the 2nd respondent. It is further pointed

out by the learned counsel for the respondents that in view of the abovesaid

settlement reached by the parties, the respondents are not pressing for the

enforcement of the impugned maintenance order and that this Court may

pass consequential orders in these proceedings, recording the abovesaid

agreement of settlement and to pass necessary orders thereon.

Submissions on the same nature have also been made by the learned

counsel appearing for the petitioner (husband).

5. In view of the abovesaid settlement and in view of the

submissions made by both sides, it is ordered that the impugned order

dated 29.05.2018 rendered by the Family Court, Palakkad in

M.C.No.108/2016 in the matter of the claim of the respondents herein for
R.P.(FC)No.410 of 2018
5

maintenance will stand set aside. The parties will be regulated by the terms

and conditions of the abovesaid application for settlement as far as the

present claim for maintenance is concerned.

With these observations and directions, the above R.P(F.C) will stand

finally disposed of.

Sd/-

ALEXANDER THOMAS
JUDGE
vgd

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link
MyNation Times Magzine


All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation