PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Nawab Singh, J.
Ravinder Kumar
Versus
Karamjeet Kaur
Decided On : JULY 9, 2008
Consent - Divorce by Mutual Consent - Withdrawal of Consent
Fact of the Case:
The wife withdrew her consent to seek a decree of divorce by mutual consent before the passing of the final decree.
Finding of the Court:
The trial Court rightly dismissed the petition as the wife had stated on oath that she wanted to continue the matrimony with her husband.
Issues: Whether the trial Court could pass a decree of divorce by mutual consent even if the wife had withdrawn her consent before the passing of the final decree.
Ratio Decidendi: The court referred to the observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Smt. Sureshta Devi v. Om Parkash, where it was held that any party has the right to withdraw consent to seek a decree of divorce by mutual consent before the passing of the final decree.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed in limine, and the trial Court's decision to dismiss the petition was upheld.
Nawab Singh, J.
1. This appeal has been filed by Ravinder Kumar, husband of Karamjeet Kaur against the judgment passed by Additional District Judge, Kurukshetra dated May 22, 2008 whereby, petition filed under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act by the parties was dismissed on the ground that Karamjeet Kaur-wife had withdrawn her consent to seek the decree of divorce by mutual consent at later stage, of course, before passing of the final decree.
Question arises as to whether the trial Court could pass decree of divorce by mutual consent even if wife had withdrawn her consent before passing of the final decree. Complete answer to this proposition is provided by the observation of their Lordships of the Honble Supreme Court made in Smt. Sureshta Devi v. Om Parkash (1991-1) 99 P.L.R. 411 (S.C.). It was authoritatively held that any of the parties has a right to withdraw consent to seek a decree of divorce by mutual consent before passing of final decree and in that eventuality, Court cannot pass a decree of mutual consent.
2. Here, in the case in hand, Karamjit Kaur had stated on oath before the trial Court that she wanted to continue matrimony with her husband. In this view of the matter, trial Court rightly dismissed the petition and there is no scope for interference. The appeal is therefore, dismissed in limine.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.