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

2020 Supreme(All) 1289

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD (LUCKNOW BENCH)
Rakesh Srivastava, J.
Sunita Maurya - Appellant
Vs.
Principal Judge Family Court Distt. Pratapgarh and Ors. - Respondent
Civil Misc. Writ Petition (M/S) No. 937 of 2020
Decided On: 04-03-2020

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Sunil Kumar Singh
For the Respondent: Bajrang Bahadur Singh

The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of reconciliation and mediation in matrimonial disputes, and the duty of the Family Court to make sincere efforts at reconciliation before proceeding with the case.

Headnote:

Divorce - Waiver of Statutory Period - Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - [DIVORCE] - [WAIVER OF STATUTORY PERIOD] - [Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955] - The court discussed the provisions of Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which allows for divorce by mutual consent. The court highlighted the conditions for initiating proceedings under Section 13-B, the procedure for the second motion, and the discretion of the court to waive the statutory period. The court emphasized the importance of reconciliation and mediation in matrimonial disputes and the duty of the Family Court to make sincere efforts at reconciliation before proceeding with the case. The court also referred to relevant provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure and the Family Courts Act, and cited previous judgments to support the importance of reconciliation in family matters. The court concluded that the Family Court did not err in rejecting the application for waiver of the six months period, as the application was vague and lacked substance, and no genuine effort for reconciliation was made.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner filed a Divorce Petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking a decree of dissolution of marriage. The petitioner moved an application for waiver of the statutory six months period, citing the need for a job and career concerns. The application was rejected by the Family Court, leading to the challenge in the present petition.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the application for waiver of the statutory period was vague and lacked substance. It also noted that no genuine effort for reconciliation was made, as the alleged mediation was conducted without any order from the Court and with undue haste. The court concluded that the Family Court did not err in rejecting the application for waiver of the six months period.

Issues: The issues involved the rejection of the application for waiver of the statutory six months period under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and the lack of genuine effort for reconciliation in the case.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of reconciliation and mediation in matrimonial disputes, citing relevant provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure and the Family Courts Act, and previous judgments. It highlighted the duty of the Family Court to make sincere efforts at reconciliation before proceeding with the case. The court concluded that the Family Court did not err in rejecting the application for waiver of the six months period, as the application was vague and lacked substance, and no genuine effort for reconciliation was made.

Final Decision: The petition was found to be devoid of merit and was accordingly dismissed by the court.

JUDGMENT :

Rakesh Srivastava, J.

1. Smt. Sunita Maurya (wife), the petitioner and Anil Kumar Maurya (husband), the respondent No. 2 were married according to Hindu rites and ceremonies, at Pratapgarh, on 12.6.2003. The parties continued to peacefully live together up to 26.2.2011, after which serious differences arose between the couple. This led to the wife initiating proceedings against the husband under Section 125 Cr.P.C. (registered as Case No. 3087 of 2013). In the said proceedings, the parties entered into a compromise. As per the said compromise the respondent No. 2 paid a sum of Rs. 2,51,000/- to the petitioner, as full and final settlement towards permanent alimony.

2. In February, 2019 the petitioner filed a Divorce Petition bearing Suit No. 104 of 2019 titled Sunita Maurya v. Anil Kumar Maurya under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1953(sic 1955) (for short 'Act') seeking a decree of dissolution of marriage. On 6.12.2019 the said petition was got dismissed as not pressed. On 7.12.2019, the petitioner as well as the respondent No. 2 filed a joint petition under Section 13-B of the Act (Original Suit No. 1093 of 2019) before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Pratapgarh seeking divorce by mutual consent.

3. On 19.12.2019 the petitioner moved an application for waiver of the statutory six months period on the ground that the petitioner was going to get a job shortly and in case the marriage was not dissolved, she would loose the job and her career would be spoiled. The respondent No. 2 endorsed 'no objection' on the said application, The relevant portion of the application is extracted below:

    ^^fouez fuosnu gS fd mDr eqdnek mHk;i{kksa dh lgefr ds vk/kkj ij ÁLrqr fd;k tk jgk gSA ÁFke i{k o f}rh; i{k ds e/; o"kZ 2015 esa gh lqyg le>kSrk gks x;k Fkk rFkk lHkh eqdnesa lekIr gks pqds FksA

ÁFke i{k ,d lfoZl ÁkIr gks jgh gS ftldh frfFk utnhd gS ftlesa fookg&foPNsn ds fMxzh dh vko';drk gS ;fn fMxzh u feyh rks ÁFke i{k ukSdjh ls foeq[k gks tk;sxh rFkk mldk dSfj;j cckZn gks tk;sxk ÁFke i{k ds firk thou e`R;q ls tw> jgsa gS ÁFke i{k o f}rh; i{k ds 'ks"k eqdnesa xqtkjk] fonkbZ] ngst o"kZ 2015 esa vyx&vyx jgus gsrq fuLrkfjr gks pqds gS rFkk mHk;i{k vyx&vyx thou;kiu dj jgs gSA

vr% ÁkFkZuk gS fd mHk; i{kksa }kjk ÁLrqr mijksDr eqdnek fuLrkfjr djus dh d`ik djsaA**

4. Through an order dated 2.1.2020, the said application has been rejected by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Pratapgarh. The relevant portion of the order, to which the attention of the Court was drawn by the counsel for the petitioner, is extracted below:

    "Heard learned counsel for the party and perused the record.

Applicant Sunita mentioned the reasons for waiving six months statutory period that she is going to obtain Government job very soon in which decree for dissolution of marriage is required if she will not get decree as early as possible then she may lost the job and her career will be destroyed. She is living separately from her husband since 2015 and all her disputes and differences have been settled.

From the perusal of the papers annexed alongwith the application being paper number 9 (x)1/8 shows that application form for the post of Physical Training Instructor Grade III 2018 was filled up by the applicant on 15th June 2018 and in this application she has declared her marital status as divorcee without getting her marriage dissolved by way of decree of divorce. She has declared herself as divorcee in her application for job and now she has filed petition under Section 13(B) for dissolution of marriage on 11/12/2019. From the above facts it is clear that without getting the decree of divorce from the Court, she has falsely stated in her application her marital status as divorcee. It is clear that to mitigate her previous false statement regarding her marital status she has filed present petition for divorce.

The reasons given by applicant for waiving of six months statutory period is that she required decree of divorce for getting Government job cannot be accept

                      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