Back
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, P. G. Ajithkumar, JJ
BIVIN JOHN
– Appellant
Versus
MINNU JOSEPH – Respondent
Mat.Appeal 370 2022
Divorce - Mutual Consent - Family Courts Act, 1984, Sections 19(1), 19(4); Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Section 13B; Divorce Act, 1869, Section 10A - The court waives the six-month cooling-off period for divorce by mutual consent, based on earlier case law establishing its discretionary nature under certain conditions.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant-husband and respondent-wife filed multiple petitions concerning their marriage, seeking dissolution, restitution of conjugal rights, maintenance, and a settlement agreement after mediation resulted in mutual consent for divorce.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the parties had settled their disputes satisfactorily and were living separately for a substantial period, allowing a waiver of the statutory cooling-off period for their mutual consent divorce.
Issues: Whether the court can waive the mandatory six-month cooling-off period stipulated in the Hindu Marriage Act and the Divorce Act under the given circumstances.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the six-month period is directory, not mandatory, allowing discretion to waive it when there are no prospects of reconciliation and the parties have settled their differences.
Final Decision: Decree of divorce granted by mutual consent, waiving the six-month cooling-off period.
JUDGMENT/ORDER
Anil K. Narendran, J.
Since parties are one and the same, these matters are heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
2. Mat. Appeal No.370 of 2022:- The appellant-
husband filed O.P.No.1022 of 2018 before the Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumanoor, against the respondent herein-wife, seeking a declaration that the marriage solemnised between the parties is null and void or in the alternative a decree for dissolution of marriage. That original petition ended in dismissal by the judgment and decree dated 28.02.2022. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant filed this appeal before this Court, invoking the provisions under Section 19 (1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 .
2.1. On 31.05.2022, when this appeal came up for admission, this Court admitted the matter on file and issued notice to the respondent by speed post.
3. Mat. Appeal No.391 of 2022:- The appellant-
husband is the respondent in O.P.No.1474 of 2018 on the file of the Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumanoor, which is one filed by the respondent herein-wife for restitution of conjugal right. By the judgment and decree dated 28.02.2022, the Family Court allowed that original petition and the appellant herein is directed to restore his company with the respondent herein and restore the marital relationship by way of decree of restitution of conjugal rights. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant is before this Court in this appeal invoking the provisions under Section 19 (1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 .
3.1. On 16.06.2022, when this appeal came up for admission, this court admitted the matter on file and issued notice to the respondent. This Court granted an interim stay, as prayed for in I.A.No.1 of 2022.
4. Mat. Appeal No.709 of 2022:- The appellant-wife filed O.P.No.44 of 2019, before the Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumanoor, against the respondent herein-husband for return of an amount of Rs.15 lakhs and gold ornaments worth of 15,39,149/-. By the judgment and decree dated 28.02.2022, that original petition was allowed in part and the appellant was directed to pay an amount of Rs.15,00,000/- within a period of one month to the respondent. In case of failure, the respondent is entitled to realise the same with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of decree till realisation. The claim for return of jewellery and balance amount stands dismissed. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant is before this Court in this appeal, invoking the provisions under Section 19 (1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 . The appeal was filed along with C.M. Application No.1 of 2022 for condonation of delay of 125 days.
5. R.P.(FC)No.221 of 2022:- The petitioner-husband is the respondent in M.C.No.219 of 2018 on the file of the Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumanoor, which was one filed by the respondent herein-wife claiming maintenance. By the order dated 28.02.2022, that M.C. was allowed and the petitioner-husband was directed to pay the respondent-wife a monthly maintenance at the rate of Rs.25,000/- from the date of order. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court, in this revision petition, which is one filed invoking the provisions under Section 19 (4) of the Family Courts Act. 5.1. On 27.07.2022, when this revision petition came up for admission, this Court issued notice on admission to the respondent. The learned counsel for the petitioner was directed to produce the objection filed in the M.C.
6. R.P.(FC)No.54 of 2023:- The petitioner-wife filed M.C.No.219 of 2018, before the Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumanoor for monthly maintenance. The said M.C. was allowed in part by the order dated 28.02.2022. The said order is under challenge in R.P.(FC)No.221 of 2022, filed by the respondent herein. In this revision, the petitioner is challenging the aforesaid order of the Family Court to the extent it denied monthly maintenance from the date of application, i.e., from 10.12.2018. This revision petition is filed along with Crl.M.A.No.1 of 2022 for condonati
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
