High CourtsDivision Bench

Smt. Richa Patel vs Peenal Patel

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 31 May 2019 · Citation: (2019) 05 RAJ CK 0269

HON’BLE JUDGES
Mohammad Rafiq, J · Narendra Singh Dhaddha, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — Section 13B, 13B(2)
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 690 Of 2019
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 707 words

This appeal has been preferred by Smt. Richa Patel assailing the order dated 3.12.2018 passed by Family Court No.1, Jaipur. The said Court by the aforesaid order has dismissed the petition jointly filed by appellant-wife and respondent-husband under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of their marriage and obtaining decree of divorce by mutual consent on the ground of its being premature.

In the application, it was stated that the marriage of the appellant and respondent was solemnised on 28.6.2018 as per the Hindu customs and rites. They do not have any issue. It was stated that appellant had on being mislead by certain person filed the first information report in Mahila Thana North, Jaipur against the respondent and his family members and that she would get the prosecution launched on that basis, withdrawn on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. It was stated that respondent-husband had submitted a cheque in the sum of Rs.1,11,000 as permanent alimony in the Family Court and appellant-wife has agreed to accept the same as permanent alimony. Both the parties on those terms wanted to get their marriage dissolved. They have prepared a compromise deed in the presence of two witnesses and the members of their community. They are residing separately since 2.10.2018. No dowry articles were given to the appellant at the time of her marriage.

When the matter was listed before the Court on 27.5.2019, appellant-wife was present in Court and was given counselling by the Court as to insufficiency of the quantum of permanent alimony. She was granted time to again think over the quantum of permanent alimony so offered; whether or not the same would be sufficient. The parties were directed to appear in person before this Court today.

The appellant-wife and respondent-wife both are present today in Court. They signed the proceedings of the Court and have been identified by their respective counsel. They submitted that differences between them are so pronounced that there is no possibility of their rapprochement. The appellant-wife was again asked by the Court whether the aforesaid amount of permanent alimony would be sufficient for her. She thereupon submits that she is a Fashion Designer by profession and is self sufficient, and can be able to maintain herself. She therefore does not need more than the aforesaid amount as permanent alimony. She wants to avail freedom by getting the marriage dissolved. The respondenthusband is also present. He also is firm on obtaining the decree of divorce. The aforesaid amount of Rs.1,11,000 as permanent alimony has been handed over to the appellant by the respondent in cash today in Court and she has accepted having received the said amount.

Learned counsel for both the parties pray that after waiving the cooling off period of six months, this court may pass a decree of divorce on mutual consent keeping in view the fact that their marriage has reached the stage of irretrievable break down. In support of this submission, learned counsel relied on the judgments of the Supreme Court in Veena Vs. State Govt. of NCT, Delhi & Anr., (2011) 14 SCC 614, Devinder Singh Narula Vs. Meenakshi Nangia - (2012) 8 SCC 580, and Amardeep Singh Vs. Harveen Kaur - (2017) 8 SCC 746.

In Amardeep Singh, supra, the Supreme Court laid down that since the cooling off period mentioned in Section 13-B(2) is not mandatory but directory, it will be open to the court to exercise its discretion in the facts and circumstances of each case where there is no possibility of parties resuming cohabitation and there are chances of alternative rehabilitation.

In view of the compromise arrived at between the parties, we are persuaded to allow the appeal. The appeal is accordingly allowed. The impugned order dated 3.12.2018 passed by the Family Court No.1, Jaipur is set side. The cooling off period of six months is waived. The marriage between appellant-wife and respondent-respondent is therefore dissolved by mutual consent with immediate effect in terms of the compromise entered into between the parties. The divorce petition no.280/2018 filed by both the parties under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the Family Court No.1, Jaipur, is accordingly allowed. Decree of divorce be prepared accordingly.