RACHNA SAINI Vs. SANWARMAL SAINI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal is directed against the order dated 4.9.10 passed by the Addl. District Judge, Neem Ka Thana, District Sikar (hereinafter referred to as 'the court below') in Civil Misc. Case No. 58/09, whereby the court below has dismissed the application filed by the parties under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'). It appears that the appellant and the respondent had filed the joint application under Section 13B of the said Act seeking divorce by mutual consent on 15.1.09. It appears that on 28.7.10 the respondent filed an application stating interalia that the application under Section 13B was filed under pressure and sought permission of the court to withdraw his consent on the application. The court below thereafter passed the impugned order dismissing the application under Section 13B of the said Act.

(2.) THE only contention raised by the learned counsel Mr. H.K. Saini for the appellant is that the respondent had withdrawn the consent after 18 months of the filing of the application under Section 13B, which he could not have withdrawn. The court does not find any substance in the said submission, inasmuch as, as per the provisions contained in Section 13B(2) of the said Act, the satisfaction of the court is material in passing the decree under the said provision. As held by the Apex Court in case of Smruti Pahariya v. Sanjay Pahariya : 2009 (4) RLW 3070 (SC), it is only on the continued mutual consent of the parties when the decree for divorce under Section 13B can be passed by the court. Since the respondent had withdrawn his consent, though after 18 months of filing of the joint petition, the court below has rightly dismissed the application under Section 13B of the said Act. It is needless to say that the concerned court has to be satisfied about the existence of mutual consent between the parties for passing the decree of divorce by mutual consent under Section 13B of the said Act. There being no illegality or impropriety in the impugned order passed by the court below, the present appeal deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed.