Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(Del) 2318

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, VIKAS MAHAJAN, JJ.
Neetu Reu - Appellant
Versus
Puneet Reu - Respondent
MAT.APP.(F.C.) 194 of 2022
Decided on : 10-01-2023

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. J.C. Mahindro and Mr. Shubham Agarwal, Advocates
For the Respondent:Mr. Tarun Sharma and Mr. Abid Ali, Advocates

The central legal point established in the judgment is the significance of mutual consent in seeking divorce under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and the court's discretion to grant waiver of the statutory period based on the circumstances of the case.

Headnote:
Divorce - Mutual Consent - Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Section 13B(1), Section 13B(2)
Fact of the Case:

The appellant filed a petition seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion, which was dismissed by the Family Court. However, the parties later settled their disputes and agreed to end the litigation by seeking divorce by mutual consent under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
Finding of the Court:

The court allowed the amendment to the divorce petition, granted waiver of the statutory period of six months, set aside the impugned order, and directed the Family Court to grant waiver of the statutory period for moving the second motion petition under Section 13B(2) of the Act. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.
Issues: Dispute resolution through mutual consent, amendment of the divorce petition, waiver of statutory period, settlement terms, and recording of statements under Section 13B of the Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of mutual consent in resolving disputes and facilitating the amendment of the divorce petition under Section 13B(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The court also recognized the protracted litigation and suffering of the parties, leading to the grant of waiver of the statutory period under Section 13B(2) of the Act.
Final Decision: The impugned order was set aside, the divorce petition was restored, and the parties were directed to personally present before the Family Court for recording their respective statements under Section 13B of the Act.

JUDGMENT :

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.

CM No. _______/2023 (amendment under Order VI Rule 17) [to be numbered]

1. In terms of the settlement recorded herein after, an application under Order VI Rule 17 Code of Civil Procedure has been handed over in court by the appellant which also encloses the proposed Amended Petition under Section 13B(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), being the first motion petition for dissolution of the marriage by mutual consent. The proposed petition is signed by both the parties. The application is taken on record.

2. Registry is directed to register and number the application.

3. In view of the settlement between the parties and with their consent, the Amendment to the Divorce Petition is allowed on the records of the Family Court. The Divorce Petition filed by the Appellant before the Family court is converted into a petition under section 13B of the Act. Copy of the proposed amended petition that has been enclosed with the application is permitted to be filed in original before the Family Court duly signed and supported by the respective affidavits of the parties.

4. The application is allowed, in the above terms.

CM NO._________/2023 (for waiver of the statutory period) [to be numbered]

1. This is an application filed on behalf of the appellant seeking waiver of the statutory period of six months prescribed under section 13B (2) of the Act.

2. Registry is directed to register and number the application.

3. The Parties who are present in person pray that keeping in view the fact that they have been living separately since 2010 and the subject divorce petition was filed in the year 2016, the statutory period of six months be waived.

4. Keeping in view the protracted litigation and the suffering that the parties have already undergone, this application is disposed of with a direction to the Family Court to grant waiver of the statutory period of six months for moving the second motion petition under Section 13B (2) of the Act.

MAT.APP.(F.C.)194/2022

1. Petitioner impugns judgment and decree dated 04.06.2022 whereby the Family court has dismissed the petition filed by the appellant seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion. The Family Court vide the impugned order dated 04.06.2022 has dismissed the petition holding that the allegations have not been proved.

2. Parties are present in person and after detailed discussion and deliberations parties have settled their disputes and amicably resolved to end the entire protracted litigation between them.

3. Parties have resolved to put an end to their disputes in the following terms:

(i) Parties agree that the impugned order dated 04.06.2022 be set aside and the petition for divorce be restored on the records of the Family court; and

(ii) Appellant-petitioner shall amend the Petition seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion and into a petition under section 13B of the Act for grant of divorce by mutual consent; and

(iii) Respondent consent to the grant of divorce by mutual consent under section 13B of the Act; and

(iv) Appellant shall file an application seeking waiver of the statutory period of six months prescribed under section 13B(2) of the Act.

(v) Both parties undertake that they shall duly give their statement before the family court for dissolving their marriage by mutual consent; and

(vi) Both parties undertake that they shall jointly file the second motion petition under section 13B(2) of the Act for grant of divorce by mutual consent.

(vii) Appellant waives her rights for maintenance and permanent alimony and undertakes that she shall not make any claim towards past, present or future maintenance or alimony.

(viii) Parties undertake that they shall not hereafter initiate any coercive proceedings against each other.

(ix) The two daughters Ms. Aakansha Reu (born on 22.10.2000) and Ms. Ananya Reu born on (28.11.2003) shall be in the custody and care of appellant Ms. Neetu Reu.

(x) It is agreed for all purposes that Ms

Click Here to Read the rest of this document