Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Smt Prerna Nigotiya W/O. Shri Pulkit ... vs Pulkit Jain S/O Shri Rajeev Jain on 5 April, 2019
Bench: Mohammad Rafiq, Goverdhan Bardhar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.1597/2019
Smt Prerna Nigotiya W/o. Shri Pulkit Jain, Aged About 27 Years,
D/o. Shri Inder Kumar Nigotiya, R/o 3954, Nigotiya House,
M.s.b. Ka Rasta, Johri Bazar, Jaipur 302003 (Rajasthan) At
Present R/o 41, Sukh Shanti Building-1, 5Th Floor, 19 Pedder
Road, Mumbai-400026.
----Appellant
Versus
Pulkit Jain S/o Shri Rajeev Jain, Aged About 30 Years, R/o
Permanent Address- 501, The Park Central, Plot No. J 91-92,
Sawai Ramsingh Road, Opposite Laxmi Vilas Hotel, Jaipur
(302004) At Present Address 18 Yonge Street, Unit 2306,
Toronto, Ontario, Canada - M5E1Z8
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Shri Rajeev Surana
For Respondent(s) : Shri S.R. Choudhary
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVERDHAN BARDHAR
Judgment
05/04/2019
This appeal on behalf of the appellant-wife Smt. Prerna Nigotiya has been filed under Section 19 of the Family Court Act, 1984, praying for quashment and setting aside the order dated 2.4.2019 passed by the Judge, Family Court No.1, Jaipur.
It is contended that both the parties have entered into a MoU dated 8.5.2018 seeking divorce by mutual consent and therefore they filed application for seeking divorce by mutual consent with the prayer that since they have already settled their disputes amicable, the period of 6 months as envisaged in Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 be waived off and decree of divorce (Downloaded on 27/06/2019 at 10:47:51 PM) (2 of 3) [CMA-1597/2019] be passed. However, the Family Court fixed the date after 6 months for granting of decree of divorce by mutual consent. Hence this appeal.
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 broken down, and the application under Section 13(B) of the Hindu Marriage Act pending before the Family Court be also allowed. 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 2.4.2019 of 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- husband is therefore dissolved by mutual consent with immediate effect in terms of the compromise entered into between the parties. The Application No.3245/2019 filed by both the parties under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and pending (Downloaded on 27/06/2019 at 10:47:51 PM) (3 of 3) [CMA-1597/2019] before the Family Court No.1, Jaipur, is accordingly allowed. Decree of divorce be prepared accordingly.
(GOVERDHAN BARDHAR),J (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ),J RAVI SHARMA /39 (Downloaded on 27/06/2019 at 10:47:51 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)