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) 871

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
K.M. Joseph, M.L. Joseph Francis, JJ.
In Re: Gopalan - Petitioner
O.P.(F.C.) No. 3473 of 2011
Decided On : 06-01-2012

Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:P.B. Sahasranaman, T.S. Harikumar & K Jagadeesh, Advocates

Headnote:Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Section 13B(2), - Family Courts Act, 1984, Sections 7 and 9 -Institution of marriage can be conserved as it has no authority to relinquish the period of six months -Section 13-B(1) and (2) is applicable if the petition is filed before district court and family court.

JUDGMENT :

K.M. Joseph, J.

An interesting question has been raised by the petitioners, arising from the seemingly inflexible mandate contained in sub-section (2) of Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, 'the Act'), requiring a waiting period of six months after the filing of the joint petition seeking dissolution of marriage by consent.

2. The petitioners, husband and wife filed O.P. No.1611/11 before the Family Court, Thrissur on 19/8/2011 under Section 13B of the Act. They also filed Ext. P2 petition under Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code (for short, 'the Code'), praying that the Court may dispense with the six months' time to dispose of the joint petition. The Family Court, Thrissur found that there is no provision to waive the statutory period of six months and dismissed the petition. Hence, this O.P. (FC) filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, wherein the prayer is to direct the Family Court, Thrissur to pass appropriate final orders on the joint petition filed under Section 13B of the Act immediately, at any rate, within two weeks from the date of the petition.

3. We heard Sri. P. B. Sahasranaman, learned counsel for the petitioners.

4. The contention of Sri. Sahasranaman runs as follows: Section 13B of the Act contains two parts; viz., Sub-section (1) and sub-section (2). We extract Section 13 B:

"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 solemnised 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 solemnised 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."

5. According to him, Section 13B contains substantial right of the parties to approach the Court seeking dissolution of marriage by mutual consent. He would point out that Section 13B speaks about a petition being filed before the District Court. The argument is that while sub-section (1) of Section 13B will apply even after the promulgation of the Family Courts Act, 1984, when the matter comes up before the Family Court in a petition under Section 13B, sub-section (2) will not restrain the power of the Family Court otherwise available to it to pass appropriate orders in accordance with the powers available to it under the Family Courts Act. He would refer to the Preamble of the said Act, which reads as follows:

"An Act to provide for the establishment of Family Courts with a view to promote conciliation in, and secure speedy settlement of disputes relating to marriage and family affairs and for matters connected therewith."

He would emphasise that the legislature was concerned to bring about a speedy settlement of disputes, as is evident from the wording of the preamble. He points out Section 4 of the Family Court Act, which deals with the appointment of judges of the Family Court. Sub-section (4) tends to indicate that there is a change brought about by the enactment of the Family Courts Act, he contends. Sub-section (4) of Section 4 of the Family Courts Act reads as follows :

"4. Appointment of Judges.

(4) In selecting persons for appointment as Judges,-

(a) every endeavour shall be made to ensure that p





















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