Mr. Augustine George Masih, J.:- Through this appeal, the appellant-petitioner has assailed the order dated 20.11.2012 passed by the learned Single Judge, dismissing the writ petition on account of delay and laches as also on merits.

2. Briefly, the facts are that marriage between appellant, Raj Kumari and respondent No.2, Bharat Bhushan Bahl was solemnized on 8.3.1961 at Garhshahkar, District Hoshiarpur, Punjab. Out of the wedlock, a son, namely, Yogesh Bahl, was born on 19.10.1963. The appellant and respondent No.2 resided together till 1965 and thereafter had been living separately. Although, it is stated by the appellant-petitioner that she had been living in her matrimonial home at Ludhiana till the year 1993 but the couple lived separately.

3. In view of these circumstances, a family settlement was arrived at and it was agreed between the parties that a formal divorce from the Court be not taken. The relatives, friends and well-wishers made every possible effort to reunite the couple. However, they failed in their efforts and ultimately a petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, “1955 Act”) for divorce by mutual consent of the parties was filed on 8.1.2001 before the Permanent Lok Adalat at Panchkula under the provisions of Section 19 of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as “1987 Act”). The appellant and respondent No.2 suffered statements before the Lok Adalat that they had agreed to divorce each other by mutual consent and that permanent alimony has been paid to the appellant, making it clear that she has nothing more to claim from respondent No.2 as the Istri Dhan has also been returned to her. This statement was recorded in Hindi and the appellant appended her signatures to the said statement, which was duly attested by the counsel, who represented her before the Lok Adalat. The petition for divorce was duly supported by the affidavits of the appellant and respondent Nos.2 and there was also an application for waiving of the mandatory period of six months as provided for under Section 13-B of 1955 Act. This waiver was sought as respondent No.2 intended to go abroad for his medical treatment. Award was passed accordingly by the Permanent Lok Adalat, Panchkula, on 8.1.2001 in the following terms:-

“Smt.Raj Kumari was married to Sh.Bharat Bhushan Bahl on 8.3.1961. After the marriage the parties lived together as husband and wife and a male child was born out of this wedlock on 19.10.1963. The name of this child is Yogesh and he is now about 37 years old. Now for the last 35 years the parties have been living separately. Because of their different temperaments they can not live together.

On the basis of the statements given by the parties, I allow this petition and dissolve the marriage between them by the means of this decree of divorce with mutual consent. As agreed, it is further ordered that petitioner No.2 will not be entitled to claim any sort of maintenance of alimony from her husband.

File be consigned to record room.”

4. In the light of the divorce by mutual consent, thereafter the parties continued to reside separately as divorced couple peacefully.

5. It is the case of the appellant that on 16.6.2010, she was informed to meet respondent No.2 and when she came to meet him, it was told to her that respondent No.2 is not at Hotel President, which is owned by him and she should go to Sector 21, Panchkula, to meet him. As per the appellant, when she went there, she was given beatings by respondent No.2 and his brother, qua which she filed a complaint in the Police Station, where, for the first time, a plea was taken by respondent No.2 that he was a divorcee and only then she came to know that a decree of divorce was passed by the Lok Adalat. As per appellant, a fraud had been played on her and she had been kept in dark. She had never appeared before the Oath Commissioner on 6.1.2001, when the affidavit was attested, which was filed alongwith the