IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
G. RADHA RANI, J.
Gaddam Navya and Another - Appellants
Versus
All Concerned - Respondent
C.R.P. No. 2543 of 2024
Decided On : 02-09-2024
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition for dissolution under hm act. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. irretrievable breakdown of marriage. (Para 4) |
| 3. conditions for mutual consent divorce. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. judicial discretion and waiver criteria. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. revision petition allowed; decree granted. (Para 13) |
ORDER :
1. This Civil Revision Petition is filed by the petitioners aggrieved by the order dated 18.07.2024 passed in I.A. No.873 of 2024 in HMOP No.89 of 2024 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Sanga Reddy.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that both the petitioners filed a petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short ‘HM Act’) for dissolution of their marriage by mutual consent and filed I.A. No.873 of 2024 under Section 13B (2) of the HM Act to waive off the cooling period of six months. But, the said application was dismissed by the trial court observing that no urgency was made out, six months mandatory period as prescribed under Section 13B (2) of the HM Act was not yet completed and no cogent reasons were brought on record. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners preferred this revision petition.
4. He further submitted that the marriage between the petitioner No.1 and petitioner No.2 was solemnized on 04.06.2021 as per Hindu rites and customs at Suryadevara Gardens, Mallampet road, near Bachupally, Sanga Reddy. It was an arranged marriage and the marriage was consummated. After the marriage, the petitioners found out that their views and ideas were not suitable to each other and they developed a dislike against each other. The marriage tie between the petitioners was broken down irretrievably and since 18.01.2022 they were living separately. The elders of both the petitioners tried to settle the differences but they could not succeed due to which the petitioners were living separately at their respective places. Having mutually and amicably settled all the disputes among themselves, both the parties entered into a Memorandum of Understanding and out of their own will, volition and clear mind, the petitioners mutually decided to seek a decree of dissolution of their marriage by mutual consent and filed the petition to waive off the mandatory statutory period. But, the same was dismissed by the trial court without considering that the petitioners were living separately for the past two years and even after involvement of the elders and their parents, they were unable to live together. Therefore, no amount of cooling period would bring the petitioners back together. There was no scope of reconciliation. They were living separately since 18.01.2022. The petitioners were unable to focus on their careers and move on in their lives. They were suffering psychologically and physically. The said issues had impacted their health and were putting their career, life and all their years of hard work at stake. It was causing extreme hardship to the petitioners to stay in the matrimonial tie together. Asking them to stay together for another year was not prudent, but the trial court had not considered the said aspect. The learned counsel relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Amit Kumar v. Suman Beniwal , 2021 SCC OnLine SC 1270 , wherein certain factors were given to exercise the discretion for waiving off the cooling period.
5. Perused the record.
6. As seen from the record, the marriage between the petitioners was admittedly solemnized on 04.06.2021 and they stated that they were living separately since 18.01.2022 and filed the OP for dissolution of their marriage on 28.06.2024 along with I.A. No.873 of 2024 to waive off the cooling period of six months. The record also would disclose that the petitioner No.2 was a resident of California, USA and was represented by his father as his GPA holder.
7. Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955, reads as under:
“13B. Divorce by mutual consent. —
(1)Subject to the provisions of this Act a petition for d
The statutory waiting period for divorce by mutual consent under the Hindu Marriage Act can be waived if there is no possibility of reconciliation and prolonged waiting would only cause additional di....
The court established that a waiver of the cooling-off period under the Hindu Marriage Act can be granted when reconciliation is deemed impossible and parties have settled their differences.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the cooling off period under Section 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is not mandatory but directory. The court emphasized the obligatio....
(1) Divorce by mutual consent – If marriage has broken down irretrievably, statutory waiting period of six months ca be waived.(2) A Judgment is a precedent for the issue of law that is raised and de....
The court has the discretion to waive the cooling-off period for divorce by mutual consent based on the circumstances of each case and the bonafideness of the parties' consent.
The court can waive the statutory waiting period for divorce under specific conditions set forth by prior rulings, indicating grounds for immediate relief.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.