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

2022 Supreme(All) 733

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
RAKESH SRIVASTAVA, AJAI KUMAR SRIVASTAVA-I, JJ.
Smt. Anamika Srivastava - Appellant
Versus
Anoop Srivastava – Respondent
FIRST APPEAL No. -30 of 2022
Decided on : 27-05-2022

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Ramesh Kumar Dwivedi
For the Respondent: Akhilesh Kumar Pandey, Akhilesh Kumar Pandey

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 142 - Family Courts Act, 1984 - Sections 19 and Section 23(2) of the Act/Section 9 - Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Section 13-B(2) - Civil Procedure Code,1908 – Order 32-A Rule 3 - Criminal Procedure Code,1973 - Section 125 - Seeking maintenance - Divorce by mutual consent - Decree of divorce on basis of mutual consent - Appellant, was married Respondent, according to Hindu rites and rituals after marriage - Differences arose between them to such an extent that Appellant left her matrimonial home then she has been living with her parents - Appellant moved an application under Section 125 CrPC against Respondent before Family Court - Case was registered as Criminal Misc. Case - Family Court allowed application moved by Appellant and directed the Respondent to pay a sum - Appellant towards maintenance with effect from the date of judgment.

Finding of the Court: Parties have lived apart for more than eleven years - Parties have appeared before Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court and have settled their dispute amicably - Parties are unwilling to live together as husband and wife - Even after eleven years of separation the parties still want to go for divorce - Considering that parties had already engaged in mediation before the Mediation Centre of this Court, and had failed to reconcile, no purpose would be served by subjecting parties to the same process again, especially when they have been living apart for several years, and marriage has irretrievably broken down.

Result: Appeal is allowed.

JUDGMENT :

1. This first appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 has been filed challenging the orders dated 02.02.2022 and 07.03.2022 passed by the Family Court (Principal Judge, Family Court, Barabanki) rejecting the prayer made by the Appellant and the Respondent to waive the minimum period of six months stipulated under Section 13-B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act') for a motion for passing a decree of divorce on the basis of mutual consent.

2. Anamika Srivastava, the Appellant, was married to Anoop Srivastava, the Respondent, according to Hindu rites and rituals at Barabanki on 17.06.2010. Soon after the marriage, differences arose between them to such an extent that the Appellant left her matrimonial home on 24.09.2010 and since then she has been living with her parents. On 01.05.2013, the Appellant moved an application under Section 125 CrPC against the Respondent before the Family Court. The said case was registered as Criminal Misc. Case No. 258 of 2013 (Anamika Srivastava vs. Anoop Srivastava). On 03.10.2018, the Family Court allowed the application moved by the Appellant and directed the Respondent to pay a sum of Rs. 5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) per month to the Appellant towards maintenance with effect from the date of judgment. The judgment and order dated 03.10.2018 was assailed by the Respondent before this Court in Criminal Revision No.10 of 2019.

3. This Court vide its order dated 08.09.2021, passed in the said criminal revision, referred the matter to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court to explore the possibility of an amicable settlement between the parties. The mediation was successful. The Appellant and the Respondent agreed to dissolve their marriage. It was agreed that the Respondent shall pay a sum of Rs. 4,25,000/-(Rupees four lacs twenty five thousand only) to the Appellant towards full and final settlement of all disputes and the litigation between them whether civil or criminal will terminate. In terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties, the Respondent paid a sum of Rs. 3,00,000 (Rupees three lacs only) to the Appellant and on 13.01.2022 the parties jointly filed an application under section 13-B of the Act before the Family Court for dissolution of their marriage. The said case was registered as Regular Suit No.56 of 2022, Smt. Anamika Srivastava v. Anoop Srivastava. A copy of the settlement agreement dated 30.03.2022 signed by the Appellant, the Respondent, their counsel and the mediator has been brought on record as annexure no. SA-2 to the supplementary affidavit dated 12.04.2022.

4. On 13.01.2022 the Family Court passed an order, whereby the petition for divorce moved by the Appellant was ordered to be registered. 02.07.2022 was the date fixed for second motion and in the meantime the parties were directed to appear before the mediation centre on 14.02.2022. The relevant portion of the order dated 13.01.2022 is quoted below:

    ^^i{kdkjks }kjk ,d lkFk jguk laHko u gksus dk dFku fd;k x;k rFkk vkilh lgefr ls rykd dh ;kpuk dh xbZA i{kdkjksa dks iquZfopkj gsrq N% ekg dk le; nsuk fof/k vuqlkj vko';d gSA
    vkns'k
    ntZ jftLVj gksA i=koyh okLrs iquZfopkj ,oa f}rh; ekspu gsrq fnukad 02-07-2022 dks is'k gksA bll iwoZ fnukad 14-02-2022 dks mHk; i{k esfM,'ku esa mifLFkr gksA^^


5. On 02.02.2022 the Appellant and the Respondent jointly moved an application before the Family Court under Section 13-B(2) of the Act, seeking waiver of six months waiting period to make a motion for the court to pass decree of divorce on the ground that the mediation between the parties had already taken place before the mediation centre of this Court wherein the parties had agreed to dissolve their marriage by mutual consent and, as such, there was no occasion for the second mediation. The said application was rejected by the Family Court. The relevant portion of the order dated 02.02.2022 reads as under:-

    ^^okn is'k gqvkA x&9 izkFkZuk i= izkFkhZx.k dh vksj ls bl vk'k;







                  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