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

2024 Supreme(Raj) 1322

IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
VINIT KUMAR MATHUR, J.
Smt. Aarti Devi - Petitioner
Versus
Ashok - Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6074 of 2024
Decided on : 09-04-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Ripu Daman Singh Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. Ramesh Advocate.

IMPORTANT POINT
The statutory waiting period under Section 13-B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is directory, allowing courts to waive it when reconciliation is unlikely and parties are educated.

Headnote:

(A) Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Section 13-B(2) - Waiver of statutory period - Joint application for waiver of six months' period dismissed by Family Court - Parties have been living separately for twelve years and reconciliation is unlikely - Conditions for waiver as per Amardeep Singh v. Harveen Kaur fulfilled - Writ petition allowed, impugned order set aside, statutory period waived. (Paras 8, 12, 14)

(B) Jurisdiction - Court's discretion to waive statutory period under Section 13-B(2) is directory, not mandatory, based on facts and circumstances of each case. (Paras 11, 20)

ORDER :

Mr. Vinit Kumar Mathur, J. - This writ petition has been preferred on behalf of the petitioner being aggrieved with the order dated 27.03.2024 passed by the Family Court No.1, Jodhpur (for short 'the court below') in Suit No. 232/2024, whereby the joint application filed by the petitioner and the respondent (hereinafter "parties") for waiver of six months period prescribed under Section 13-B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act of 1955') has been dismissed.

2. Learned counsel for the respondent, submitted that the respondent is also aggrieved with the order impugned and this writ petition has been filed with the consent of the respondent. Learned counsel submitted that he has no objection if the relief prayed for in this writ petition is granted.

3. Brief facts of the case are that the marriage of the parties was solemnized as per Hindu customs on 10.06.2022 in Bikaner. It appears that soon after the marriage, the relations of the parties became strained and both of them have been residing separately from last twelve years.

4. Despite the best efforts of the parties to restore conjugal relations and in spite of regular counselling by their near relatives, the matrimonial dispute between them could not be settled and therefore the parties jointly filed an application under Section 13-B of the Act of 1955 seeking divorce by mutual consent before the court below on 13/02/2024.

5. The court below registered the said application and fixed the next date as 28.08.2022 for counselling of the parties.

6. In the meantime, the parties preferred a joint application praying for waiver of six months' statutory period specified under Section 13-B(2) of the Act of 1955. Arguments on the said application were heard and the court below dismissed the said application vide its order dated 27.03.2024.

7. Being aggrieved with order dated 27.03.2024, the present writ petition has been preferred before this Court.

8. Learned counsel for the parties have submitted that both, the petitioner and the respondent are highly educated persons and both of them have decided to end their marriage by mutual consent after due deliberations. It is also submitted that the decision by the parties to end their marriage has not been taken in a hurry and reconciliation between the parties is highly unlikely. It is further submitted that the conditions set out in the case of Amardeep Singh v. Harveen Kaur, reported in (2017) 8 SCC 746, under which statutory period of six months, as specified under Section 13-B(2) of the Act of 1955, can be waived are fulfilled in the present case and the court below has erred in refusing waiver of the six months' statutory period.

9. Learned counsel for the parties have therefore jointly 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.

10. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order.

11. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Amardeep Singh's case (supra) has held 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

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