SHILPA CHAUDHARY Vs. PRINCIPAL JUDGE AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant and the second respondent contracted marriage as per hindu rites and custom on 20 November, 2010. In August 2013 a joint petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (Act, 1955) was instituted before the Family Court, at Muzaffarnagar, seeking divorce on mutual consent. The petition being Case No. 1149 of 2014 (Smt. Shilpa Chaudhary v. Vikram Singh). Though dates were fixed by the Court, however, the matter could not be taken for hearing, finally the applicant left the country for Boston, USA, for pursuing her carrier. The applicant executed power of attorney in favour of her mother for parivi and to enter into a compromise for dissolution of the marriage before the Family Court. On 28 November, 2015 applicant filed an application (11Ka) through her counsel and prayed for decision/disposal of the case, but by the impugned order dated 17 December, 2015 the application was rejected.

(2.) The learned court noted in the impugned order that merely on the basis of an affidavit, the marriage cannot be dissolved in proceedings under Section 13B of Act, 1955. The presence of the parties is necessarily mandatory, further, the electronic facility available in the court cannot be used, as there being no device for interacting with a party who is residing outside the country. The applicant is assailing the order in supervisory proceedings under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) Submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that there being no possibility of reconciliation between the parties, therefore, the learned court, at the best, could have arrived at a conclusion upon having the statement recorded through videoconferencing or of the power of attorney holder.