LAWS(DLH)-2010-1-74

URVASHI SIBAL Vs. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI

Decided On January 07, 2010
URVASHI SIBAL Appellant
V/S
GOVT, OF NCT OF DELHI. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Parties to the petition were married on 17.02.2009. Due to temperamental difference and irretrievable broke down of marriage, parties started living separately since 17.03.2009. Since one year had not elapsed from the date of separation, an application under Section 14 of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter referred to as 'Act') was filed for waiver of one year statutory period for divorce by mutual consent under Section 13(B) of the Act. The said application was dismissed by the trial court vide impugned order dated 18.11.2009 in view of 'Anil Kumar Jain v. Maya Jain, 2009 2 DMC 449 SC'.

(2.) In Anil Kumar Jain's case (supra), the Supreme Court was pleased to hold that it was only the Supreme Court in exercise of its extraordinary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, who could waive the statutory period and pass decree for divorce by mutual consent under Section 13(B)(2) of the Act. It was further held that neither the Civil Court nor even the High Court can pass an order before the expiry of period prescribed under the relevant provision of the Act or on grounds not provided under Section 13 and 13B of the Act. Therefore, the Supreme Court did not confine itself to the question of waiver of six months period as is required to be observed by the parties after a petition under Section 13 (B) (1) of the Act is filed and allowed, before filing a petition under Section 13(B)(2) of the Act. It discussed the power of this Court as well as of the Civil Court and its own court to waive the statutory period prescribed under Section 13(B) or any other relevant provision of the Act or on grounds not provided under Section 13 and 13(B) of the Act.

(3.) It is submitted by Ms. Meenakshi Lekhi, learned Counsel for the Petitioners that this is a case where parties cannot reconcile their dispute as marriage is irretrievable broke down and therefore, the Court is within its right to invoke proviso to Section 14 of the Act and permit the parties to file a petition under Section 13(B) of the Act before expiry of the statutory period of one year. These submissions are devoid of merits.