Judgment - WP-5822-2021.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

Writ Petition No. 5822 / 2021

Pritam Vijaykumar Dargad

Age : 31 years, Occu. Service,

R/o. C/o. Zensar I.T. Park,

Kharadi Area, Pune.

District Pune.

.. Petitioner

Versus

Sujata Pritam Dargad

Age : 27 years, Occu. Household,

R/o. C/o. Shri Ashok Laddha

Jaikwadi Vasahat, Gangakhed,

Taluka – Gangakhed, Dist. Parbhani. .. Respondent

****

Mr. Rathi Swapnil S., Advocate for Petitioner.

Mr. S.S. Gangakhedkar, Advocate for Respondent / Sole.

****

1/6

Judgment - WP-5822-2021.doc

CORAM

: SANDEEP K. SHINDE J.

RESERVED ON

: 29

th JUNE, 2021.

PRONOUNCED ON :

3

rd JULY, 2021.

JUDGMENT : -

1.

Rule.

2.

Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard fnally with the

consent of parties.

3.

Solitary, question that emanates for consideration in this

Petition is; Whether the minimum period of six months

stipulated under Section 13-B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act,

1955 (the Act) for a motion for passing decree of divorce on

the basis of mutual consent is mandatory or can be relaxed in

any exceptional situations ?

4.

The parties to the petition, are husband and wife, whose

marriage was solemnized on 22

nd

April, 2015. Their

temperament seldom matched. Resultantly, wife had instituted

2/6

Judgment - WP-5822-2021.doc

the proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, 1973; and under Domestic Violence Act, 2005. She

withdrew both the proceedings. Husband had fled a petition

under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act. It was decreed in

November, 2018. The Prosecution launched against the

husband under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860,

also has been settled. As on today, no matrimonial disputes

or any proceedings arising therefrom, are pending against each

other. On 4

th February, 2021, parties to this petition, instituted

the petition for dissolution of marriage by mutual consent. In

consideration of the facts of the case, an application was

moved for waiving cooling period for six months. The learned

Civil Judge, Senior Division, Gangakhed, rejected the application

only on the ground that eforts were not made for mediation to

reunite the parties.

5.

The learned trial Court relied on the judgment of the

Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Amardeep Singh Vs.

Harveen Kaur reported in AIR 2017 Supreme Court 4417. The

3/6

Judgment - WP-5822-2021.doc

Hon’ble Apex Court in the cited judgment said that, where

Court dealing with the matter, if a case is made out to waive

statutory period under Section 13-B(2), it can do so after

considering the following:

“(i) statutory period of six months specifed S.13-B(2), in

addition to statutory period of one year under S. 13-B(1)

of separation of parties is already over before frst motion

itself;

(ii) all eforts for mediation/conciliation including eforts in

terms of Order XXXIIA, Rule 3, CPC/S. 23(2) of the Act/

S.9 of Family Courts Act to reunite parties have failed

and there is no likelihood of success in that direction by

any further eforts;

(iii) parties have genuinely settled their diferences

including alimony, custody of child or any other pending

issues between the parties;

(v) waiting period will only prolong their agony.”

.

As stated above, the learned trial Judge declined to waive

the cooling period for non-fulfllment of condition no. (ii),

4/6

Judgment - WP-5822-2021.doc

reproduced hereinabove.

6.

The parties to the petition, have fled an application, duly

verifed by them, to state, that the parties were referred to

mediation by this Court vide order dated 6

th April, 2021.

Accordingly, both and their respective lawyers had appeared

before the Mediator and after mediation parties resided to get

separated. The Paragraph No.3 of the application suggests

that the parties have entered and executed the consent terms,

which were placed on record of Hindu Marriage P