- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) On 22.02.2006 while disposing of Civil Appeal No. 6352 of 2004, this Court passed the following order: "Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as the respondent, who is appearing in person. The respondent filed a petition for grant of decree for divorce on the ground of cruelty, adultery and desertion. The trial court dismissed the petition holding that none of the three grounds was proved. Against the said order when an appeal was preferred by the respondent before the High Court, by the impugned order, a decree for divorce has been granted on the ground of desertion. Hence, this appeal by special leave. Having heard the parties at length, we are of the view that the High Court has not committed any error in granting decree for divorce on the ground of desertion, but we are of the view that no provision has been made in the impugned order either with respect to permanent alimony or with respect to the marriage of Navatha, second daughter of the parties. The respondent stated before this Court that he undertakes to pay a sum of Rupees eight lakhs to the appellant wife i.e. Rupees five lakhs by way of permanent alimony and Rupees three lakhs towards expenses of marriage of the said second daughter. The said amount shall be paid by account payee demands drafts in the name of the appellant wife. The respondent stated that out of the aforesaid amount of Rupees eight lakhs, a sum of Rupees four lakhs shall be paid by 31.08.2006 and the balance amount of Rupees four lakhs will be paid by 30.04.2007. Let the respondent pay the aforesaid amount accordingly. It has been stated by the respondent that a criminal case under Ss. 448 and 379 of the Penal Code, 1860 is pending against his brother Vijay Kumar, bearing CR No. 719 of 2003, which is pending in the Court of IIIrd Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada. In view of the aforesaid facts, the criminal prosecution of Vijay Kumar in the aforesaid case is hereby quashed. It has been stated by the respondent that his brother Vijay Kumar has filed Original Suit No. 3134 of 2003, which is pending in the Court of First Additional Junior Civil Judge, Vijayawada, which shall be withdrawn by his brother Vijay Kumar. It is directed that the said civil suit shall stand withdrawn. With the aforesaid directions, the appeal is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs."
(3.) According to the directions given in the aforesaid order, the respondent husband was required to pay the sum of rupees five lakhs to the wife by way of permanent alimony and another sum of rupees three lakhs towards the expenses of the marriage of the second daughter begotten by the respondent from the appellant. Time was also fixed for payment of the aforesaid amount i.e. rupees four lakhs by 31.08.2006, and the balance amount by 30.04.2007. As the contemnor agreed to pay the permanent alimony for the maintenance of the wife and expenses towards the marriage of the daughter, this Court quashed the prosecution pending against Vijay Kumar, brother of the contemnor, in the criminal case, bearing CR No. 719 of 2003, under Ss. 448 and 379 of the Penal Code, 1860 pending in the Court of the IIIrd Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada, within the State of Andhra Pradesh.;