NAVEEN KUMAR DASS Vs. REENA KUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the petitioner in person through video conferencing. In view of the nature of the order being passed hereinafter, no notice is required to be issued to the respondent.

(2.) The parties to the lis are husband and wife. Marriage was solemnized between them as per Roman Catholic Rights and Rituals at Shimla on 15/2/2009. Marital discord developed between them. No issue was born to them. They are stated to be residing separately w.e.f. 18/3/2018. Petitioner/husband is a practicing lawyer, whereas respondent/wife is holding post­graduate qualification and is stated to be gainfully employed. Petition for dissolution of marriage by decree of divorce by mutual consent under Sec. 28 of Special Marriage Act, 1954 was filed by the parties before the learned District Judge (Family Court) Shimla. The statements of parties, qua first motion were recorded by learned District Judge (Family Court) Shimla on 4/12/2020. The parties jointly stated as under:­

(3.) The petitioner appearing in person through video conferencing submits that in the instant case the parties have explored all possibilities of reconciliation but failed. And it is only thereafter, they had preferred the petition for divorce by mutual consent under Sec. 28 of the Special Marriage Act. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the statutory period of six months deserves to be relaxed. With this objective, he has filed the instant petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India for the following prayer:­