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

2023 Supreme(Raj) 2076

IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J.
Smt. Vinita Tak and Other - Petitioners
Versus
None – Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13696 of 2023
Decided On : 18-09-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. Mohan Ram Suthar.

The court can waive the statutory waiting period for divorce under specific conditions set forth by prior rulings, indicating grounds for immediate relief.

Headnote:This writ petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking to quash an order from Family Court and to allow a divorce application under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act. The Court observed that the statutory waiting period can be waived if conditions set by past judgments are fulfilled. The petitioners demonstrated a mutual decision for divorce, fulfilling the aforementioned conditions. Consequently, the waiver of the statutory period was granted and the Family Court's order was set aside.

Table of Content
1. court observes that mutual decision to end marriage fulfills waiver criteria. (Para 1 , 7 , 8)
2. court can waive statutory waiting period for divorce when conditions are met. (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
3. previous cases support waiver of cooling off period under similar circumstances. (Para 5 , 6)

ORDER :

(Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J.)

This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred claiming the following reliefs :-

    "1. Order impugned dated 07.08.2023 (Annexure 3) passed by the learned Judge, Family Court No.1, Jodhpur in Civil Case No.686/2023 (214/2023) (NCV No.688/2023) may kindly be quashed and set aside.

    2. It may kindly be ordered to be allowed the application of the petitioners under Section 13-B of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT as prayed and ordered to issued the divorce decree.

    3. Any other writ order or direction, which is favourable to the petitioners, may kindly be passed, as an alternative relief.

    Any other order favourable to the petitioner may also be passed."

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners jointly submits that the marriage of the petitioners was solemnized with Hindu rites and ritual on 19.04.2022 and are living separately from last more than one year. Learned counsel further submits that the conciliation efforts have been made by both the parties with the help of family members and elders of the society. Learned counsel also submits that the both the petitioners arrived at a joint settlement to part ways as the marriage has irretrievably broken down.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Amardeep Singh v. Harveen Kaur , reported in (2017) 8 SCC 746; has waived off the cooling period for the second motion; relevant portion reads as under :-

    "19. Applying the above to the present situation, we are of the view that where the Court dealing with a matter is satisfied that a case is made out to waive the statutory period under Section 13-B(2), it can do so after considering the following :

    i) the statutory period of six months specified in Section 13-B(2), in addition to the statutory period of one year under Section 13-B(1) of separation of parties is already over before the first motion itself;

    ii) all efforts for mediation/conciliation including efforts in terms of Order 32-A Rule 3 CPC/Section 23(2) of the Act/ Section 9 of the FAMILY COURTS ACT to reunite the parties have failed and there is no likelihood of success in that direction by any further efforts;

    iii) the parties have genuinely settled their differences including alimony, custody of child or any other pending issues between the parties;

    iv) the waiting period will only prolong their agony.

    The waiver application can be filed one week after the first motion giving reasons for the prayer for waiver. If the above conditions are satisfied, the waiver of the waiting period for the second motion will be in the discretion of the court concerned.

    20. Since we are of the view that the period mentioned in Section 13- (2) is not mandatory but directory, it will be open to the Court to exercise its discretion in the facts and circumstances of each case where there is no possibility of parties resuming cohabitation and there are chances of alternative rehabilitation."

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has therefore, prayed that the order impugned be set aside and the court below be directed to condone or waive the statutory period specified under Section 13-B(2) of the Act of 1955.

5. At this juncture, this Court considers it appropriate to reproduce the relevant portion of the Judgment rendered in the case of Smt. Nisha Yadav v. Sandeep Yadav (D.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.2505/2019) decided by the Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court at Jaipur Bench on 09.07.2019, as hereunder:-

    "Learned counsel for both the parties pray that after waiving the cooling off period of six months, this court may pass a decree of divorce on mutual consent keeping in view the fact that their mar

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 Back to top