SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2012 Supreme(Ker) 631

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
K.T. SANKARAN & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ.
Gijoosh Gopi, Alappuzha
Versus
S. Sruthi, Alappuzha
O.P. (FC). No. 2272 of 2012
Decided on : 17-08-2012

Appearing Advocates:
For the Petitioner:Rinny Stephen Chamaparampil, Asha Elizabeth Mathew, Advocates. For the Respondent:P. Subramodam, Jawahar Jose, Advocates.

Headnote:Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Sections 13B and 14 Proviso - Not with a limitation period the court can grant leave to present the petition as per section 14 of the act as to avoid hardship and immorality held in the provision.

JUDGMENT :-

K.T. Sankaran, J.

1. The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnized on 24.4.2012. The parties are Hindus. On the date of marriage itself, they realized that they could not continue the marital relationship. The respondent expressed the view that she was not willing for the marriage and she wanted to marry another man. She also stated that she agreed for the marriage only due to the compulsion on the part of her parents. The marriage was not consummated. Mediators intervened. On 31.5.2012, an agreement was executed between the parties in the presence of the representatives of SNDP Sakhas in which the parties are members. On the same day, viz., 31.5.2012, the parties filed a petition under Section 13B of the Hindu marriage Act, 1955 (for short, ‘the Act’) before the Family Court, Alappuzha. Since the application was filed before the expiry of the period of one year from the date of marriage, they filed an application under the proviso to Section 14 of the Act to allow them to present the petition under Section 13B before the expiry of one year since the date of marriage. In the affidavit, the facts and circumstances were explained in detail. It was also stated that exceptional hardship would be caused to the parties, if the petition was not entertained.

2. The court below dismissed the application for leave to present the petition before the expiry of one year of the date of marriage, by the order impugned in this Original Petition (FC). The Family Court held that no exceptional circumstances were made out for granting leave as prayed for by the parties.

3. Section 13B of the Act was inserted by the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1976 (Act 68 of 1976). Sub Section (1) of Section 13B reads as follows:

13B. Divorce by mutual consent

(1) Subject to the provisions of this Act a petition for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce may be presented to the district court by both the parties to a marriage together, whether such marriage was solemnized before or after the commencement of the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1976 (68 of 1976), on the ground that they have been living separately for a period of one year or more, that they have not been able to live together and that they have mutually agreed that the marriage should be dissolved.

(2) On the motion of both the parties made not earlier than six months after the date of the presentation of the petition referred to in sub-section (1) and not later than eighteen months after the said date, if the petition is not withdrawn in the meantime, the Court shall, on being satisfied, after hearing the parties and after making such inquiry as it thinks fit, that a marriage has been solemnized and that the averments in the petition are true, pass a decree of divorce declaring the marriage to be dissolved with effect from the date of the decree.

4. It is provided in sub section (1) of Section 13B that a petition for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce under Section 13B may be filed “subject to the provisions of the Act”. Section 14 of the Act provides that notwithstanding anything contained in the Act, it shall not be competent for any court to entertain any petition for dissolution of a marriage by a decree of divorce, unless at the date of presentation of the petition one year has elapsed since the date of the marriage. The words “unless at the date of presentation of the petition one year has elapsed” were substituted by the Amendment Act 68 of 1976 for the words “before three years have elapsed”.

5. For the sake of convenience, Section 14 of the Act is extracted below:

“14. No petition for divorce to be presented within one year of marriage

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, it shall not be competent for any Court to entertain any petition for dissolution of a marriage by a decree of divorce, unless at the date of the presentation of the petition one year has elapsed since the date of the marriage:

Provided that the Cou




Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top