ORDER :

1. This appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 is directed against the order dated 29.04.2023 passed by the Family Court No.3, Jodhpur, whereby the application filed by the appellants seeking dispensing with the period prescribed under Section 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (‘the Act’) has been rejected.

2. The appellants filed a joint application under Section 13B of the Act before the Family Court No.1, Jodhpur on 17.04.2023 seeking divorce on mutual consent and on 24.04.2023, after mediation with the parties the case was registered and for the purpose of second motion as prescribed under Section 13B(2) of the Act and evidence, the next date fixed in the matter was 19.10.2023. Whereafter, the matter was transferred from the Family Court No.1, Jodhpur to Family Court No.3, Jodhpur and again matter was fixed on 19.10.2023. On 28.04.2023, the appellants filed an application seeking dispensing with the requirement of six months’ period as prescribed under Section 13B(2) of the Act and dissolve the marriage solemnized by the parties on 08.03.2019.

3. The application was filed with the submissions that the wife was working as Transport Admn. at Dubai and she has a Visa for the period 03.02.2023 to 02.02.2025 and has received a mail on 25.02.2023, whereby she has to report back by 01.05.2023 else, she may loose her job. The husband, who is appearing from Merrut (Uttar Pradesh), has no objection and there is no dispute pending between the parties. Along with the application, the documents supporting the plea were filed.

4. The Family Court made reference to the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Amardeep Singh v. Harveen Kaur : (2017) 8 SCC 746 and came to the conclusion that the efforts for mediation/conciliation as envisaged under the said judgment, have not been made and it cannot be said that there are no possibilities of reunion between the parties and holding of the mediation/conciliation between the parties is justified and consequently, rejected the application and fixed the matter on 19.10.2023, the date already fixed.

5. Both the parties have filed the present appeal questioning the validity of order passed by the Family Court refusing to grant the relief of dispensing with the requirement of the cooling off period of six months and has sought passing of an order granting divorce by mutation consent in terms of the compromise and the petition filed by the appellants and dissolve the marriage.

6. As both the parties had filed the appeal, there was none to oppose the appeal.

7. On 06.07.2023, a Co-ordinate Bench called upon Mr. Sanjeet Purohit, learned counsel to assist the Court as Amicus Curiae on the aspect with regard to legal issues arising in the appeal with reference to the Constitution Bench judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan : Transfer Petition (Civil) No.1118/2014, decided on 01.05.2023 relatable to the question and jurisdiction of the trial court to waive the statutory period of six months as provided under Section 13B(2) of the Act.

8. Today, learned counsel for the appellants and learned Amicus Curiae have made detailed submissions in relation to the Constitution Bench judgment in the case of Shilpa Sailesh (supra) as well as law with regard to waiver of the statutory period prescribed under Section 13B(2) of the Act.

9. It was submitted by learned Amicus Curiae that the judgment in the case of Shilpa Sailesh (supra), essentially deals with the power and jurisdiction of the Hon’ble Supreme Court under Article 142(1) of the Constitution of India, while hearing a transfer petition or in any other proceedings, in dispensing with the period and the procedure prescribed under Section 13B of the Act and quash other connected proceedings between the parties. The Court was further dealing with the issue of grant of divorce in exercise of power under Article 142(1) of the Constitution of India when there is complete and irretrievable breakdown of