ANNUSREE GLORYSON v. GLORYSON R.B.CHALIL
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
The writ petition is disposed of as above
Judgment
APPENDIX IN W.P.(C) No.3953 of 2009EXT.P1TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT PREFERRED BEFORE THE SUB INSPECTOROF POLICE ERNAKULAM, NORTH POLICE STATION DATED 1.6.2008EXT.P2TRUE COPY OF O.P.NO.813 OF 2008 DATED 13.6.2008 FILED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT AT ERNKULAM. EXT.P3TRUE COPY OF O.P.NO.1307 OF 2008 CLAIMING CUSTODY OF THE MINORCHILD DATED 20.9.2008 FILED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P4TRUE COPY OF M.C.NO.367 OF 2008 DATED 3.12.2008 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT ERNAKULAM. EXT.P5TRUE COPY OF C.M.P.NO.85 OF 2009 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFOREJUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I AT ERNAKULAM DATED 8.1.2009EXT.P6TRUE COPY OF F.I.R.NO.70 OF 2009 DATED 13.1.2009EXT.P7TRUE COPY OF C.M.P.NO.61 OF 2009 DATED 8.1.2009ON THE FILE OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURTII AT ERNAKULAM. //TRUE COPY//P.A. TO JUDGE. P.R.RAMAN & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ.-------------------------------W.P.(C) No.3953 of 2009-------------------------------Dated this the 11th March, 2009J U D G M E N TRaman, J.Petitioner is the wife of the first respondent.
Theirmarriage was solemnised on 26.1.2003. She seeks for adirection to the Family Court to seek the services of a welfareexpert to settle the matrimonial disputes between the parties, and to grant such other reliefs, as may be prayed for. 2. During the pendency of the above proceedings, the parties have compromised and settled the dispute. Accordingly, I.A.No.3565 of 2009 is filed. We have alsointeracted with the parties and it is stated before us that theyhave voluntarily entered into an agreement and prayed that thematter be disposed of recording the compromise and in termsthereof. W.P.(C) No.3953 of 200923. As a matter of fact, a compromise is reachedonly because of the efforts made by this Court appointing amediator and we have already recorded, in our order dated25.2.2009, that in view of the attempts so made, furtherproceedings pending before the Family Court and otherauthorities, what so ever the dispute between the parties, willstand stayed.
Operative part
In the affidavit filed, in support of thecompromise petition now filed, it is averred that with theassistance of the Mediator, appointed by this Court, the partieshave resolved their matrimonial disputes and have resumed co-habitation. 4. As such, the further proceedings now pending inO.P.Nos. 813/2008, 1307 of 2008, M.C.No.367 of 2008, on thefile of the Family Court, Ernakulam are struck off from the files, as it is not necessary to proceed with those cases and hasbecome infructuous. By virtue of the compromise arrived atbetween the parties, C.M.P.No.61 of 2009, pending on the fileof Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Ernakulam is also W.P.(C) No.3953 of 20093struck off from the file. Crime No.70 of 2009 of Ernakulam TownNorth Police Station, will stand quashed. 5. A copy of this order shall be produced before the Family Court, Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, as alsobefore the Station-in-charge of the Ernakulam Town NorthPolice Station, for information and for necessary endorsement tobe made in the concerned files pending before the authorities, interms of the above order. 6. We appreciate on record the services renderedby Smt. Reshmi Damodaran, Mediator, for bringing out anamicable settlement between the parties. The writ petition is disposed of as above. P.R.RAMAN, JUDGEP.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE.nj.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The writ petition is disposed of as above
Which court decided this case, and when?
Kerala High Court, on 11 Mar 2009. The bench was P S GOPINATHAN.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.