Madras High Court
Rathiha vs Jeyaprakash Narayanan on 28 August, 2018
Author: R. Subbiah
Bench: R. Subbiah, M.S. Ramesh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 28.08.2018 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. SUBBIAH and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH Review Application No. 144 of 2017 --- Rathiha .. Petitioner Versus Jeyaprakash Narayanan .. Respondent Review Application filed under Order XLVII Rules 1 and 2 of Code of Civil Procedure read with Section 114 of the Code of Civil Procedure Appeal to review the Order dated 28.04.2017 passed in C.M.A. No. 1320 of 2012. For Appellant : Ms. R. Sankaranarayanan, Senior Advocate for Ms. K. Sumathi For Respondent : Mr. K. Balasubramaniam ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by R. SUBBIAH, J) This review application is filed to review the order dated 28.04.2017 passed in C.M.A. No. 1320 of 2012, whereby, this Court, while recording the compromise memo dated 28.04.2017 entered into between the petitioner and the respondent, confirmed the decree of divorce granted by the II Additional Family Court, Chennai in OP No. 64 of 2007, dissolving the marriage solemnised between the petitioner and the respondent on the ground of cruelty.
2. The present review application has been filed by the petitioner mainly on the ground that in the joint memorandum of compromise dated 28.04.2017, it was agreed between the petitioner and the respondent that the marriage solemnised between them shall be declared by a decree of mutual consent by setting aside the decree of divorce granted by the Family Court on the ground of cruelty. However, while passing the Judgment dated 28.04.2017, in para No.4, this Court, while recording the compromise memo, refused to set aside the decree of divorce granted by the Family Court on the ground of cruelty.
3. We have heard the learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent. According to the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner, when the appeal was disposed of by recording the terms and conditions entered into between the petitioner and the respondent in the compromise memo dated 28.04.2017, refusing to set aside the decree of divorce granted by the Court below on the ground of cruelty has caused prejudice to the petitioner and it has to be reviewed.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the respondent is a party to the compromise memo dated 28.04.2017 and that he has no objection for allowing the review application as prayed for.
5. Having regard to the submission made by the counsel for both sides, we are of the view that Para No.4 of the Judgment dated 28.04.2017 passed in C.M.A. No. 1320 of 2012 is required to be reviewed. Accordingly, para No.4 of the Judgment dated 28.04.2017 is modified and it shall be read as follows:-
4. It is evident from the terms of the Memo of Compromise that the appellant and the respondent pray this Court to set aside the Decree and Judgment passed by the Family Court dissolving their marriage on the grounds of cruelty and desertion and to grant divorce on the ground of mutual consent. Accordingly, the decree dated 22.03.2012 passed in O.P. No. 64 of 2007 on the file of II Additional Family Court, Chennai is set aside, instead, there will be a decree of divorce, dissolving the marriage solemnised between the petitioner and the respondent on 09.10.2005, by mutual consent. The Compromise Memo dated 28.04.2017 entered into between the petitioner and the respondent shall form part of the records."
6. Accordingly, the Review Application is allowed. No costs.
(R.P.S.J.,) (M.S.R.J.,)
28-08-2018
rsh
Speaking / Non-speaking Order
To
The II Additional Family Court
Chennai
R. SUBBIAH, J
and
M.S. RAMESH, J
rsh
Rev.Appln. No. 144 of 2017
28-08-2018