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

2022 Supreme(MP) 1382

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, J.
Pritish Nandi & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Not Mention Not Mention Not Mention (Madhya Pradesh) – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 21344 of 2022
Decided On : 22-11-2022

Advocates Appeared:
Shri Saleem Rehman - Advocate, for the Appellant.

The main legal point established is that the cooling period of six months under section 10A of the Divorce Act, 1869, can be waived off in exceptional situations where parties have genuinely settled their differences and there is no possibility of reunion, based on the interpretation and precedent set by the Supreme Court.

Headnote:

Divorce - Waiving off Cooling Period - Divorce Act, 1869 - Section 10A

Fact of the Case:

The husband and wife, both of Indian domicile and Christians by faith, filed for divorce under section 10-A of the Divorce Act, 1869, seeking to waive off the cooling period. The application was rejected by the Family Court.

Finding of the Court:

The court, considering the precedent set by the Supreme Court in the case of Amardeep Singh Vs. Harveen Kaur, held that the cooling period of six months under section 10A of the Divorce Act, 1869, can be waived off in exceptional situations where parties have genuinely settled their differences and there is no possibility of reunion.

Issues: The main issue was whether the cooling period under section 10A of the Divorce Act, 1869, could be waived off in the case of mutual consent divorce by considering the precedent set by the Supreme Court.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the interpretation of the provisions contained in Section 10A of the Divorce Act, 1869, and the precedent set by the Supreme Court in Amardeep Singh case to waive off the cooling period, considering the parties' genuine settlement and no possibility of reunion.

Final Decision: The court set aside the impugned order and directed the Family Court to proceed further in accordance with law, allowing the writ petition.

ORDER

1. The husband and wife have jointly filed an application under section 10-A of the Divorce Act, 1869, before the Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, Jabalpur, in Case No.CCB/16/2009.RCSA.91/2022 for waiving off the cooling period, which has been rejected.

2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the husband and wife are of Indian domicile and are Christians by faith and religion. On 23.7.2018 both of them were lawfully married. Marriage certificate dated 29.8.2018 was issued. Since their marriage was not successful, therefore, they have decided to obtain the decree of divorce by mutual consent. Both of them have decided to seek divorce and to live separately, therefore, it was prayed that pendency of divorce petition may be waived off.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is no possibility of compromise between the parties in future.

3. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Amardeep singh Vs. Harveen Kaur, reported in AIR 2017 SC 4417, has considered the question whether the minimum period of six months stipulated under section 13(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1955') for a motion for a passing decree of divorce on the basis of mutual consent is mandatory or directory and whether such period can be relaxed in exceptional situation. The object of the provisions contained in section 13B of the Act of 1955 was considered by the Apex court and it was held as follows :-

    "7. In Amardeep Singh (supra), after analysing the provision contained in Section 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the Hon'ble Supreme Court further held as follows:

    "18. 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 13-B(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 XXXIIA, Rule 3, CPC/Section 23(2) of the Act/Section 9 of the Family Courts Act to re-unite the parties have failed and there is no likelihood of success in that direction by any further efforts;

    iii) the parties have genuinely settled their O.P.(FC) No.577/2018 differences including alimony, custody of child or any other pending issues between the parties;

    iv) the waiting period will only prolong their agony.

    19. The waiver application can be filed one week after the first motion giving reasons for the prayer for waiver.

    20. If the above conditions are satisfied, the waiver of the waiting period for the second motion will be in the discretion of the concerned Court.

    21. Since we are of the view that the period mentioned in Section 13-B(2) is not mandatory but directory, it will be open to the Court to exercise its discretion in the facts and circumstances of each case where there is no possibility of parties resuming cohabitation and there are chances of alternative rehabilitation."

    9. At this juncture, we find it advantageous to extract here the provisions contained in Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and Section 10A of the Divorce Act, 1869. Section 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 reads as follows:

    "13B Divorce by mutual consent.- (1) Subject to the provisions of this Act a petition for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce may be presented to the District Court by both the parties to a marriage together, whether such marriage was solemnised before or after the commencement of the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1976, on the ground that they have been living separately for a period of one year or more, that they have not been able to live together and that they have mutually agreed that the marriage should be dissolved.

    (2) On the motion of both the parties made

    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