NIRAJ BHANUSHANKAR UPADHYAY Vs. NIDHI NIRAJ UPADHYAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE . Learned Advocate Mr Vishal P. Thakkar waives service of notice of Rule for the opponent -wife. Mr Vishal Thakkar, learned Advocate has submitted that during the course of the day he will file his appearance. I have heard learned Advocate Mr Premal S. Rachh for the petitioner -husband as well as Learned Advocate Mr Vishal Thakkar for the opponent -wife.

(2.) BEING aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and order dated 1.10.2012 passed by the learned 9th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bhavnagar below Exh. 14 in Hindu Marriage Petition No. 183 of 2011 whereby the application jointly preferred by the petitioner and respondent seeking to convert the petition filed under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, "the Act") into a petition under section 13 B(1) of the Act and the order dated 22.2.2013 passed by learned 5th Additional District Judge, Bhavnagar in Civil Misc. Appeal No.145 of 2012, confirming the order passed below Exh. 14 in HMP No. 183/2011.

(3.) THE marriage between the petitioner and respondent herein got solemnized on 12.8.2008. Though in the initial period the married life was smooth but thereafter the they were not leading a happy married life due to some misunderstanding and the petitioner decided to part with the respondent. Out of the wedlock, there are no children. The petitioner and respondent started residing separately since August, 2011. As there were no chance of reunion, on 23.11.2011, the petitioner filed a divorce petition being Hindu Marriage Petition No.183 of 2011 under section 13 of the Act in the civil court at Bhavnagar. During the pendency of the petition, the petitioner and respondent entered into a compromise and agreed to get separated amicably. Accordingly they jointly preferred an application below Exh. 14 to convert the aforesaid application into a consent divorce petition under section 13B (1) of the Act on 18.6.2012. The learned Judge rejected the application vide order dated 1.10.2012. The petitioner challenged the said order by way of appeal before the learned 5th Addl. District Judge, Bhavnagar which was also rejected vide order dated 22.2.2013.