2023 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 6846
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 05.01.2023 CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI CRP(MD)No.21 of 2023
1.J.Rajkumar
2.Bahnisikha ... Petitioners Vs Nil ... Respondent PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to set aside the order dated 15.11.2022 passed in I.A.No.1633 of 2022 in O.P.No.1182 of 2022 on the file of the Family Court, Madurai.
For Petitioners : Mr.B.Asha
O R D E R
This Civil Revision Petition is filed as against the order passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Madurai in I.A.No.1633 of
2022 in O.P.No.1182 of 2022, dated 15.11.2022.
2. The petitioners herein are husband and wife. Their marriage was a love marriage and was solemnized on 01.02.2017, as per Hindu customs and rituals. Out of the wedlock, they have blessed with a female baby on 22.01.2021. Thereafter, their relationship got strained and they decided to separate mutually. Though the elders and family members of the petitioners had taken several efforts for re- union, it ended in vain. Now, both have agreed for divorce by mutual consent. Therefore, the petitioners filed a petition for dissolution of marriage by mutual consent, under Section 13(B)(2) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in O.P.No.1182 of 2022, before the Family Court, Madurai and the same was posted for further hearing on 20.04.2023. Along with the original petition, the petitioners also filed an interlocutory application in I.A.No.1633 of 2022 to waive the cooling off period of six months. However, it was dismissed by the trial Court. Hence, the petitioners are before this Court with this Civil Revision Petition.
3. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners by referring the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Amardeep Singh Vs Harveen Kaur reported in 2017 (4) RCR (Civil) 608 and Amit Kumar Vs Suman Beniwal [C.A.No.7650 of 2021] submits that statutory cooling off period can be waived in cases of mutual consent divorce. According to her, the petitioners have been living separately for the past two years and she has made a specific averments that there was no cohabitation among them and there is no possibilities between them to restive, mediate or cohabit in future. The trial Court, without considering these averments dismissed the application in I.A.No.1633 of 2022, under a wrong motion that there was no effective mediation and reconciliation for reunion in accordance with law.
4. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and perused the materials placed on record.
5. Admittedly, the marriage between the petitioners was a love marriage and was solemnized on 01.02.2017. They claim that due to some misunderstanding, they have been living separately for more than two years. Now they have filed a petition in O.P.No.1182 of 2022, before the Family Court, Madurai for dissolution of marriage by mutual consent and the same is posted to 20.04.2023, in view of the provisions under Order 13B (2) of the Act. Along with the original petition, the petitioners have also filed an interlocutory application in I.A.No.1633 of 2022 to waive the cooling off period of six months as provided under 13B (2) of the Act. However, the same was dismissed by the trial Court.
6.As per the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, all the efforts for mediation/conciliation including efforts under Order 32 A Rule 3 of Civil Procedure Code, Section 23(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act and Section 9 of the Family Courts Act to reunite the parties have to be taken and if it is failed and if there is no likelihood of success in that direction, the Court may proceed further by cooling off the waiving period under order 32A Rule 3 of Civil Procedure Code.
6.1.For ready reference, Order 32A Rule 3 of Civil Procedure Code is extracted as under:-
3.Duty of Court to make efforts for settlement.
(1) In every suit or proceeding to which this Order applies, an endeavour shall be made by the Court in the first instance, where it is possible to do so consistent with the nature and circumstances of the case, to assist the parties in arriving at a settlement, in respect of the subject-matter of the suit.
(2) If, in any such suit or proceeding, at any stage it appears to the Court that there is a reasonable possibility of a settlement between the parties, the Court may adjourn the proceeding for such period as it thinks fit to enable attempts to be made to effect such a settlement.
(3) The power conferred by su