SWARNJEET Vs. SWARN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 28.10.2015, whereby application of the petitioner/wife filed under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC dated 15.05.2015 is disallowed by the court below.

(2.) Criticizing the said order, Shri Bhargav contended that the petitioner filed a case of domestic violence before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Indore, which was registered as Case No.51/2011. The petitioner also filed an application under Section 13 (1) of Hindu Marriage Act (for short, the 'Act'), which was registered as H.M.A. Case No.270/2012. The respondent/husband filed his reply in the said case. He filed a counter case under Section 23-A of the Act. During the pendency of the case, the petitioner filed the said amendment application on the ground that since both the parties are seeking divorce by way of claim and counter claim, therefore, in the interest of justice and future prospects of the parties, amendment be allowed so that the matter be amicably settled under Section 13-B of the Act. The court below rejected the said amendment application on irrelevant and incorrect consideration.

(3.) Prayer is opposed by Shri Pankaj R. Soni, learned counsel for the respondent. Shri Soni vehemently argued that various attempts to settle the dispute between the parties amicably could not fetch any result. The mediation failed on several occasions. Thus, matter may be heard and decided on its own merits. He contended that there is no consent on behalf of the respondent about Section 13-B of the Act. In absence thereto, even otherwise amendment application will be of no use.