MEENA KUMARI Vs. KALYAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant-Meena Kumari was married to respondent Kalyan Singh according to Hindu rites in the year 1975. A petition dated March 21, 19 (sic) filed by the appellant, Meena Kumari in the Court of (Additional District Judge, Hisar) for annulment of the marriage under Section 12(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and for dissolution of marriage by way of decree of divorce under Section 13 of the Act on various allegations mentioned in the petition. However, that petition was dismissed on June 7, 1996. The present appeal was filed against that judgment. Notice of motion was issued to respondent Kalyan Singh. During the course of arguments, the parties showed their willingness to get divorce by mutual consent. A civil Misc. application was moved jointly by the parties to convert the proceedings from under Sections 12/13 of the Act to Section 13-B of the Act and they be granted decree of divorce by mutual consent. That application has been allowed by us by an order of even date.

(2.) Statements of appellant Meena Kumari and respondent Kalyan Singh have been recorded. Meena Kumari appellant has stated that there were always bickerings between her and the respondent right from day one of marriage and they hardly stayed together. There has been no issue out of the wed-lock. She is working as a J.B.T. Teacher in a Government Primary School. Since the parties are not temperamentally compatible to each other and are living separately for the last more than 20 years and there is no likelihood of any-reconciliation, they be granted decree of divorce by mutual consent. The period spent by them in pursuing the petition under Sections 12/13 of the Act be reckoned toward the compulsory waiting period under Section 13-B (2) of the Act. The appellant further stated that she will not claim any alimony or maintenance from the husband and all allegations made by her against him (respondent-Kalyan Singh) in her petition under Sections 12/13 of the Act be considered to have been withdrawn. Rather she was paying Rs. 20,000/- to the respondent, Kalyan Singh, as she could afford that much money for respondent. The respondent, Kalyan Singh, endorsed the statement of the appellant.

(3.) After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through their statements, we are of the view that it is a case of broken marriage where reconciliation is not possible at all. The parties are living separately for more than 20 years. There is no issue out of the wed-lock. The appellant has not claimed any maintenance or alimony from the respondent-husband, rather has paid Rs. 20,000/- to him and has withdrawn all the allegations made by her against the respondent in her petition under Section 12/13 of the Act be reckoned towards the compulsory waiting period under Section 13-B (2) of the Act. Taking into consideration the statements' of the parties, we hereby accept the petition of the parties under Section 13-B of the Act and grant the decree of divorce by mutual consent. The parties will have no claim whatsoever against each other on any count. The allegations made by appellant Meena Kumari against respondent Kalyan Singh in her petition under Sections 12/13 of the Act will stand withdrawn. Let decree-sheet be prepared.