(1.) This is joint Revision Petition preferred by both the spouses against the order passed by the Additional District Judge, Ludhiana, in a joint petition filed by them under S.13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, praying for a Decree of Divorce by mutual consent. The learned Additional District Judge has observed in the impugned order that at the time of presentation of the petition, the statements of the parties had not been recorded and on this ground, by means of the impugned order, he adjourned the case for another six months with the observation that the parties are given time to 're-think' over the matter. Such a procedure is not envisaged under the law. Section 13B(1) makes no provision for the recording of the statements of the parties at the time of the filing of the joint petition and merely because their statements were not so recorded, they could not have been denied the relief of Divorce. After the expiry of the period of six months from the first date of hearing in the joint petition, the case has to be taken up as provided under sub-sec.(2) of S.13 Band it is on that date that the Court is to be satisfied, after hearing the parties and after making such inquiry as it thinks fit, that the marriage be dissolved. In the present case, both the spouses made separate statements before the learned Additional District Judge, to the effect that they could not live together and that they had mutually agreed to the dissolution of their marriage. Hardly any other material was necessary for the satisfaction of the Court in this behalf.
(2.) In view of what has been observed above, the impugned order passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Ludhiana, on Aug. 22, 1985, is, therefore, unsustainable and is set aside. A Decree of Divorce by mutual consent is passed in favour of the parties. Their marriage stands dissolved forthwith.
(3.) The Revision Petition is disposed of accordingly. Order accordingly.