Statutory requirement of separation for one year prior to divorce petition was satisfied despite initial dismissal.

1. Gaurav and Hemangi, who had instituted Family Suit No. 182 of 2015, have felt aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the learned Judge, Family Court No.3, Ahmedabad, Dated:
19.08.2015, whereby, the Court below dismissed the petition filed under S.13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, 'the Act'), on the ground that before the learned Judge both the petitioners, therein, orally conveyed that they have been staying separately since 31.12.2014, meaning thereby a period less than statutory period of one year of separation prior to filing of the petition, and therefore, the Court below came to the conclusion that the petition is not maintainable and dismissed the same.

2. Here, it may be noted that, though, Gaurav and Hemangi had jointly filed the petition under S.13B of the Act before the Court below, Gaurav has been shown as the appellant, whereas, Hemangi has been shown as opponent in the present appeal, and hence, leave to amend the cause title in the memo of appeal and the cause title in affidavits filed by both of them is GRANTED. The amendment be carried out within a period of one week, from today.

3. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present appeal are that the marriage of the appellant with the Respondent, herein was solemnized on 15.02.2013 as per the rituals. The marriage came to be registered on 28.02.2013 at SR. No. 86 of 2013 with Registrar of Marriage, Ahmedabad. After the marriage the respondent was residing with the appellant at her matrimonial home. It appears that after sometime, difference of opinions arose between the appellant and the respondent and due to that they started residing separately from 01.01.2014. It appears that, though, the attempts were made to find an amicable solution, same went in vain, and therefore, both the appellant as well as the respondent, herein, filed a Suit for dissolution of marriage by mutual consent before the learned Family Court, Ahmedabad. From the record, it appears that on an inquiry from the learned Judge, both the appellant as well as the respondent stated that they had been residing separately since 31.12.2014 instead of 01.01.2014. On the aforesaid, technical error, the learned Judge dismissed the Suit. Hence, the present appeal. The Court below has recorded, in Paragraphs - 4 and 5 of the impugned judgment and order, as under;
"4. The Conciliator has made efforts for reconciliation between the petitioners, but, the said efforts went in vain and the petitioners have reiterated the contents of their petition and requested to dissolve their marriage. The report of the conciliator is on record at Exh.9.
5. The petitioners appeared before this Court in person along with their Ld. Advocate after the expiry petition and requested to dissolve their marriage by mutual consent. None of the petitioners has withdrawn his or her consent given for obtaining a decree of divorce by mutual consent. The petitioners have submitted their affidavits in lieu of examination - in - chief at Exh. 10 and 11 respectively. It is relevant to note here that while making an inquiry with regard to the contents of the petition and affidavits filed by the petitioners, this court specifically asked the date of separation and both the petitioners have specifically stated that they have been living separately since 31-12-2014. This Court has recorded the say of the petitioners below Exh. 1."

4. Further, Paragraphs - 7 and 10 of the impugned judgment and order of the Court below, read as under;
"7. Admittedly, the petitioners have filed this petition for obtaining decree of divorce by mutual consent under S.13 - B of the Act. It is, therefore, necessary to go through the provisions of S.13 - B of the Act, which reads as under:
"S.