Shavinder Kaur vs Akashdeep - 2022 Supreme(P&H) 333

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(P&H) 333

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Archana Puri, J.
Shavinder Kaur – Appellant
Versus
Akashdeep – Respondent
CM-7899-CII-2022 in/and CR-2500-2022 (O&M)
Decided On : 11-07-2022

Advocates Appeared:
Mr.Shubham Goyal Advocat, for the petitioner; Mr.Piyush Setia, Advocat, for the respondent

Headnote:
waiver of statutory wait - divorce petition - Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act - 13B(2), 125 Cr.P.C., Domestic Violence Act, SC/ST Act, Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act - The court discussed the waiver of the statutory waiting period for divorce under Section 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, emphasizing the factors to be considered for exercising discretion to waive the waiting period. The court also highlighted the settlement of disputes between the parties and the absence of chances of reconciliation, leading to the setting aside of the impugned order and directing the parties to appear for recording of the statements of second motion.
Fact of the Case:

The parties sought waiver of the statutory wait of six months for recording the statements of second motion in a divorce petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act. The court set aside the impugned order and directed the parties to appear for recording of the statements of second motion.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the parties had settled their disputes, lived separately for about 3 years, and had no chances of reconciliation. It set aside the impugned order and directed the parties to appear for recording of the statements of second motion.
Issues: Waiver of statutory waiting period for divorce under Section 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, settlement of disputes between the parties, absence of chances of reconciliation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the factors to be considered for exercising discretion to waive the waiting period for divorce under Section 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, including the length of marriage, separation, pending litigation, possibility of reconciliation, and settlement of disputes.
Final Decision: The impugned order was set aside, and the parties were directed to appear for recording of the statements of second motion in the divorce petition.

JUDGMENT

Archana Puri, J. - CM-7899-CII-2022

1. The present application has been filed for placing on record copies of statements of Shavinder Kaur and Akashdeep dated 11.04.2022 as Annexures P-4 and P-5.

2. In view of the averments made in the application, the same is allowed and statements of Shavinder Kaur and Akashdeep are taken on record.

CR-2500-2022

3. Challenge in the present revision petition is to the order dated 23.05.2022 (Annexure P-3), passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ferozepur, whereby the joint application (Annexure P-2) filed by the parties for waiver of the statutory period of six months for recording the statements of second motion, has been declined.

4. The material facts of the case are as follows:-

5. That marriage between parties i.e. Shavinder Kaur and Akashdeep was solemnized on 10.10.2016. After marriage, they lived together in the matrimonial house and one girl child, namely Vani was born on 16.05.2018. However, due to temperamental differences, they could not pull well with each other and they are residing separate since 24.06.2019. Considering the broken status of their marriage, they filed petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act on 11.04.2022. On that very day, the statements of first motion were recorded and case was further adjourned to 17.10.2022, for recording of the statements of second motion. However, during the pendency of the petition, a joint application was filed by both Shavinder Kaur and Akashdeep, thereby seeking waiver of statutory wait of six months.

6. Vide impugned order dated 23.05.2022, the above-said application for seeking waiver of statutory wait of six months, was dismissed.

7. Feeling aggrieved by the above-said order, the present petition has been filed by petitioner-wife Shavinder Kaur. However, in pursuance of notice issued, respondent-husband Akashdeep also made appearance through counsel.

8. Now, both the counsel for Shavinder Kaur and Akashdeep have submitted in unison that, due to temperamental incompatibility, they could not live together and they are residing separate since 24.06.2019. Considering the broken status of the marriage, divorce petition by mutual consent has been filed. All terms of separation have been duly complied between them. Out of the settled amount of Rs.8 lakh, Rs.4 lakh had been paid to the petitioner-Shavinder Kaur by respondent-Akashdeep, at the time of recording of statements of first motion and the residue amount of Rs.4 lakh is to be paid at the time of recording of statements of second motion. Besides the same, they have also agreed to seek appropriate remedy qua the withdrawal/quashing of the various rounds of litigation, pending between them i.e. application under Section 125 Cr.P.C., petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, one complaint under SC/ST Act and also, petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, filed by respondent-Akashdeep.

9. It is submitted that parties are living separate since 24.06.2019 and all efforts made to save their marriage, proved futile. All terms of separation, by and large, have been complied with. They have also submitted that marriage between the parties has irretrievably broken and there are chances of re-settlement of both petitioner as well as respondent. As such, it is submitted that six months' waiting period be waived off.

10. In Amardeep Singh vs. Harveen Kuar, 2017 (8) SCC 746, the Hon'ble Supreme Court 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 13B(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 32A Rule