Govind Mathur, J.

1. This appeal is before us to examine correctness of the judgment and decree dated 21.5.2015, passed by Family Court, Bhilwara in Civil Misc. Case No. 103/2012 (Old No. 260/2009).

2. Succinctly, facts of the case are that appellant Smt. Vijaylaxmi entered into a wedlock with the respondent on 26.1.2000 as per Hindu rites. She gave birth to a girl child on 29.6.2001 and to a boy on 27.5.2003. On 17.2.2005 Smt. Vijaylaxmi came to be employed as Teacher in a Government School. In the year 2009 she preferred an application as per Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 to get her marriage annulled on the count of cruelty said to be advanced by the respondent. As per the appellant, her husband was in habit of harassing and humiliating her on the count of dowry and was also snatching the entire salary earned by her. He also threatened to deface the appellant by pouring acid. Looking to the cruel attitude of the respondent she left her matrimonial house and proceeded for Badaut (Uttar Pradesh), her parental house.

3. The respondent contested the application with assertion that whatever allegations made are false, he never demanded dowry and also not grabbed the wages earned by the appellant. As per the respondent, the appellant had extra marital relations with one Shri Devendra Singh Chouhan with whom he was keeping bigamous relations since March, 2009. It was also stated that the wages earned by the appellant were used to be deposited in her own bank account and 'stridhan' was also with her.

4. By way of filing rejoinder, the appellant denied the fact relating to her marriage with Devendra Singh. She also reiterated the allegations with regard to demand of dowry and grabbing of her wages.

5. On basis of the pleadings available, the trial court framed six issues as under:-

1. Whether the behaviour of the respondent was cruel against the appellant for demand of dowry? (to be proved by the appellant)

2. Whether the respondent is not discharging his matrimonial responsibility? (to be proved by the appellant)

3. Whether the respondent deserted his wife and children? (to be proved by the appellant)

4. Whether the appellant entered into a second marriage with Shri Devendra Singh Chouhan son of Manmohan Singh Chouhan, resident of Asind in the month of March, 2009? (to be proved by the respondent)

5. Whether the appellant took the ornaments of 50 Tolas and a policy of life insurance? Its effect? (to be proved by the respondent.

6. Relief?

6. After examining the entire evidence available on record the trial court decided the issues No. 2, 3 and 4 against the appellant in and in favour of the respondent. With regard to issue No. 5 the court was of the view that the same is having no relevance and effect in a case relating to divorce. The issue No. 1 was considered by the trial court in detail culminating into a finding against the appellant. Accordingly, the application was rejected and decree sheet was prepared.

7. In appeal, the appellant contended that the Family Court failed to appreciate the entire evidence in correct perspective, thus, arrived at a conclusion contrary to the material available on record.

8. This Court by an order dated 4.1.2016, referred the matter for mediation, which came to be successful and the parties had no grievance with each other on being arrived at a amicable settlement with the terms and conditions as under:-

1. The parties are agreeable to get the decree of dissolution of marriage and accordingly the respondent husband has consented that the appeal pending before the Hon'ble Court may be allowed.

2. The appellant herein Smt. Vijay Laxmi shall withdraw the complaint filed by her before the learned magistrate at Bhilwara against her husband and his relatives, under the Domestic Violence Act.

3. The appellant shall not claim any maintenance or monthly arrear for her self or for her minor children, from the respondent or his relatives, in future also.

4. There shall be no claim of any party regardin