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

2025 Supreme(Online)(MP) 6282

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
HIRDESH, J
SMT. POOJA AGARWAL – Appellant
Versus
SHIVAM AGRAWAL – Respondent
MISC. PETITION 4850 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Shri Prem Singh Bhadouria
For the Respondents: Shri Deependra Singh Raghuwanshi

The court clarified that the statutory waiting period for divorce is not mandatory and can be waived based on discretionary factors such as prior separation duration and reconciliation attempts.

Headnote:(A) Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Section 13-B - Waiver of the mandatory cooling-off period for divorce by mutual consent - The Family Court incorrectly concluded that the conditions for waiver were mandatory, not considering the discretionary nature of the court's powers under the Act; the Supreme Court in Amardeep Singh vs. Harveen Kaur clarified that other factors must also be considered. (Paras 3, 6, 8)

(B) Judicial Discretion - The exercise of judicial discretion to waive the cooling-off period depends upon the specific facts of each case, including the time of separation and efforts at reconciliation. Findings based on the parties' willingness to divorce after considerable separation were crucial in overturning the Family Court's decision. (Paras 7, 8)

Table of Content
1. petitioner presents reasons for waiver of cooling-off period. (Para 2 , 3)
ORDER

1. Heard finally at motion stage, with the consent of both parties.

2. This Miscellaneous Petition filed by petitioner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against order dated 19.08.2025 passed in Case No. 1009/2025 ( HMA ) by Principal Judge, Family Court, Gwalior, whereby a joint application filed by parties therein to waive off the mandatory cooling period of six months' time as provided under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as '' the HM Act'') has been rejected.

3. It is the contention of petitioner that she and respondent got married on 21.02.2022 according to Hindu rites and rituals. On account of irreconcilable differences, both of them separated since long time. Since there was no possibility of conciliation between the parties and no dispute was pending between them, therefore, they filed an application under Signature Not Verified Signed by: MAHENDRA Section 13-(B) of HM Act for decree of divorce by mutual consent. Relying on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Amardeep Singh Vs. Harveen Kaur , reported in (2017) 8 SCC 746 , a joint application seeking waive off the cooling period was also filed inter alia stating that both petitioner and respondent have been living separately living for a long time. Thereafter, many times parents and relatives tried to reconcile between both of them, but due to ideological differences further marital life of petitioner and respondent can not be succeeded in future. There is no possibility to live with each other. It is contended that the aforesaid application to waive off the cooling period of six months came to be dismissed by the Family Court vide impugned order dated 19.08.2025, mentioning the fact that petitioner and respondent have not mentioned any reason or factual circumstances in detail in their application and no documents have been brought on record to support the application, therefore, the statutory period of six months cannot be waived off because all the conditions are not fulfilled.

4. Being aggrieved by order dated 19.08.2025, petitioner filed the instant miscellaneous petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

5. Further, it is contended that as has already been held by the Hon'ble Apex Court even the conditions as enumerated in the case of Amardeep Singh (supra) are not mandatory, the Court can exercise its discretion taking into account other circumstances as well. The learned Family Court has committed an error in deciding the application without applying its judicial mind. Hence, prayed for setting aside the impugned order.

Signature Not Verified Signed by: MAHENDRA

6. While dealing with the matter in regard to waive the statutory period under Section 13-B (2) of HM Act, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Amardeep Singh (supra) has observed as under:-

''(i) The statutory period of six months specified in Section 13B(2), in addition to the statutory period of one year under Section 13B(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 32A Rule 3 CPC/Section 23 (2) of the Act/Section 9 of the Family Courts Act to reunite 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 differences including alimony, custody of child or any other pending issues between the parties;

(iv) The waiting period will only prolong their agony. The waiver application can be filed one week after the first motion giving reasons for the prayer for waiver. If the above conditions are satisfied, the waiver of the waiting period for the second motion will be in the discretion of the court concerned.

Since I am of the view that the period mentioned in Section 13B(2)

of HM Act is not mandatory but directory, it will be open to the

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