Mutual Divorce do not need cooling period of 6 months

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — S. 13-B(2) — Divorce by mutual consent — Cooling-off period of six months:

For determining whether provision is mandatory or directory, language alone is not decisive and court must have regard to context, subject matter and object of provision. Court can waive off statutory period under S. 13-B(2) in its discretion after considering following factors:

(i) statutory period of six months specified in S. 13-B(2) in addition to statutory period of one year separation under S. 13-B(1) is already over before first motion itself;

(ii) no likelihood of reconciliation between parties;

 

(iii) parties have genuinely settled all their differences including alimony, custody of child or any other pending issue; and

(iv) whether waiting period would only prolong agony.

Thus, cooling-off period being directory, it is open to court to exercise its discretion in facts and circumstances of each case where there is no possibility of parties resuming cohabitation and there are chances of alternative rehabilitation.

Moreover, in conducting such proceedings the court can also use the medium of videoconferencing and also permit genuine representation of the parties through close relations such as parents or siblings where the parties are unable to appear in person for any just and valid reason as may satisfy the court, to advance the interest of justice. [Amardeep Singh v. Harveen Kaur,(2017) 8 SCC 746]

About the author

Advocateji.Com publishes problems of public & provides free advice in 24 hours on its web-site at New Delhi

1 Comment

  • kirloskant Madani says:

    I OWN A FLAT IN MUMBAI WHICH IS LET OUT TO A TENANT (LADIES) AND THE POLICE VERIFICATION IS ALSO GIVEN TO SOCIETY IN THE NAME OF TENANT AND THE AGREEMENT IS REGISTERED. TENANT REQUIRE THIS FLAT FOR RESIDENCE OF HER 2-3 COLLEAGUES (ALL WORKING LADIES NOT STAYING IN MUMBAI) AND OWNER HAS NO OBJECTION TO THIS ARRANGEMENT. SOCIETY IS CHARGING PENALTY RS 1500/- EVERY MONTH ON THE GROUND AS POLICE VERIFICATION IS IN NAME OF TENANT AND TENANT COLLEAGUES ARE STAYING IN FLAT AND THE FACT IS NOT IN THE AGREEMENT. THE OWNER ARGUMENT IS I HAVE GIVEN FLAT UNDER L/L ARRANGEMENT AND COMPLY WITH ALL THE REQUIREMENT OF THE SOCIETY. WHY SOCIETY HAS A PROBLEM IF TENANT WANT HIS FRIENDS OR COLLEAGUES LIVE IN THE FLAT AND OWNER HAS NO OBJECTION TO IT. please reply

    View Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.