J U D G M E N T

A.Muhamed Mustaque, J.

The parties are present. We interacted with them. The respondent admitted that he has received a communication pronouncing Khula by the appellant. The appellant submitted that she is not willing to reconsider her decision to revoke Khula and to live with the respondent, though an offer has been made from his side for resumption of cohabitation.

2. This appeal is at the instance of the wife challenging dismissal of the petition for divorce initiated under the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act , 1939. The parties were married on 27.09.2014 in accordance with the personal law applicable to Muslim community. In their wedlock, a boy child was born. It seems the parties are living separately for the last more than five years.

3. In the Family Court, the husband filed a counter claim for restitution of conjugal rights. That has been allowed. No challenge has been preferred against that order. The wife has come up with this appeal challenging dismissal of the petition for divorce.

4. Pending appeal, the appellant-wife invoked extra judicial divorce and pronounced Khula. Consequently, she unilaterally terminated the marriage. A copy of the Khula has been