Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH
Mohammad Rafiq, Narendra Singh Dhaddha, JJ.
Nitish Agarwal – Appellant
Versus
Anchal Singhal – Respondent
D.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 2933 of 2019
Decided On : 17-09-2019
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Section 13B, 14 – Divorce – Rejection of two separate applications; one under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and another under Section 14 of the Act, jointly filed by appellant-husband and the respondent-wife - Statutory provisions cannot be made useless provision of law by giving such an interpretation that the parties can ask the Court to waive the waiting period that too in mechanical manner when their exists no reason for doing so.
Finding of the Court:
That marriage of the parties was solemnized. No child is born out of their wedlock. Differences arose between the appellant-husband and the respondent-wife soon after the marriage, due to which it was not possible for them to live together. Resultantly, they started living separately. Thereafter, an application under Section 13B of the Act and another application under Section 14 of the Act were jointly filed by them before the Family Court, which vide impugned order has dismissed both the applications.
Facts of the Case:
We make it clear that we have not expressed either way on such plea set up in the application directly filed before this Court. Liberty is granted to the appellant/parties to file detailed application under Section 14(1) of the Act before that Court. It would also be open for the parties to plead such further and additional grounds with specific instances or produce them in sealed cover, which may bring their case in either of the exceptional categories. If any such application is filed by the parties, the Family Court shall hear the parties either in the open Court or in camera proceedings and take appropriate view of the matter.
Result: Appeal is allowed in part.
JUDGMENT :
Mohammad Rafiq, J.
1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant-husband Nitish Agarwal against order dated 18.05.2019 passed by the Family Court No. 2, Jaipur (for short 'the Family Court'), which has thereby rejected two separate applications; one under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act') and another under Section 14 of the Act, jointly filed by appellant-husband and the respondent-wife.
2. Learned counsel for the parties submitted that marriage of the parties was solemnized on 11.12.2018 at Jaipur. No child is born out of their wedlock. Differences arose between the appellant-husband and the respondent-wife soon after the marriage, due to which it was not possible for them to live together. Resultantly, they started living separately. Thereafter, an application under Section 13B of the Act and another application under Section 14 of the Act were jointly filed by them before the Family Court, which vide impugned order dated 18.05.2019 has dismissed both the applications.
3. When the matter was listed before this Court on 16.08.2019, the parties filed joint affidavit which was taken on record. On 19.08.2019, both the parties were present in the Court and expressed that their marriage has come to a stage of irretrievable break down and they want to get decree of divorce by mutual consent. The parties signed order sheet on that day and they were identified by their counsel. The joint affidavit filed by the parties on 16.08.2019 reads as under:
2. That we both remain together for a month i.e. upto 10th January, 2019.
3. That during the period of one month, we resided together could not digest the behavior of each other.
4. That whenever we talked other party took otherwise. During this one month period when we resided together there would be few times when we talked in normal way.
5. That after the marriage the differences arises between the parties to the extent that there living together and performing of conjugal rights become difficult. They are passing their life solitary. They with their Family members tried to restitute the matrimonial relation between the parties but the differences have become so deepened that there living with together as Husband and Wife is not possible. So, the parties decided to get a decree of dissolution of marriage by mutual consent.
6. That the contents are very clear. Further there are so many things which is not possible to write each and every word in the application, which affects the character and conduct of the parties, which may affect the future career of the parties. It is a case one of exceptional hardship to the petitioner or of exceptional Depravity on the party of the respondent.
7. That it has become impossible to live with each other. Impossible living includes complete mutual distrust, doubt shattered etc., that may cause unpleasant incident and may be violent to the extent which may cause substantial injury to each other or may cause harm to himself or herself.
8. That it is pertinent to mention here that a mutual compromise/settlement has taken place between the parties including all the expenses for streedhan and maintenance etc. settlement has taken place for an amount of Rs. 31,00,000/- whereas 50% of this amount i.e. 15,50,000/- has been given by way of D.D. at the time of filing of the application under Section 13(B) of the Hindu Marriage Act. Remained 50% i.e. Rs. 15,50,000/- is to be given at the time of passing of decree."
4. Subsequently, the parties also filed a joint application under Section 14 of the Act before this Court on 27.08.2019, which reads as under:
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
