Six months of cooling period is not necessary under Sec-13(B) Mutual Consent Divorce – SC

In Nov 2020 the Supreme court held that the minimum cooling period of six months for granting the decree of divorce under the 13(B) Hindu law can be waived by a trial court if there was no possibility of cohabitation between an estranged couple.

The 1955 Hindu Marriage Act provides a statutory cooling period of six months between the first and last motion to seek divorce by mutual consent to explore the possibility of settlement and cohabitation.

“We are of the view that the period mentioned in section 13B(2) is not mandatory but directory; it will be open to the court to exercise its discretion in the facts and circumstances of each case where there is no possibility of parties resuming cohabitation and there are chances of alternative rehabilitation,”.      By –Justices A K Goel and U U Lalit.

The apex court said the minimum period of six months can be relaxed by the trial court in certain situations and the estranged couple, who are seeking divorce with mutual consent, can file waiver application after a week of filing the first motion.

The top court also said that in conducting such proceedings, the trial court “can also use the medium of video conferencing and 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”.

The court noted in its verdict that the object of the cooling off period was to safeguard against a “hurried decision” if there was otherwise a possibility of differences being reconciled.

“Though every effort has to be made to save a marriage, if there are no chances of reunion and there are chances of fresh rehabilitation, the court should not be powerless in enabling the parties to have a better option,” By- SC

“In determining the question whether the provision is mandatory or directory, language alone is not always decisive. The court has to have the regard to the context, the subject matter and the object of the provision,” By- SC

The bench was dealing with a plea filed by an estranged couple “Amardeep Singh vs Harveen Kaur” which had sought waiver of the six month period on the ground that they have been living separately for the past eight years and there was no possibility of their re-union.


SC Judgement-

Amardeep_Singh_vs_Harveen_Kaur_on_12_September,_2017 (2)

 

Leave a Reply

Articles

Amarose Skin Tag Remover Reviews (Scam Exposed) Ingredients and Side Effects

Might it be said that you are one of those people encountering skin names, moles, and moles on different bits of your body? These vexatious marks can make anyone look terrible and are extremely typical among people in all districts of the planet. The particular justification behind these names stays dark, but it is problematic […]

Read More
Best air purifiers for car exhaust
Articles

How To Choose The Best Air Purifier For Car Exhaust?

Air purifiers are becoming increasingly popular for car owners, as they help to reduce air pollution and protect the health of the driver and passengers. Car exhaust contains many harmful pollutants, such as particulate matter, carbon monoxide, and nitrogen oxide. An air purifier can help to reduce these pollutants and provide a cleaner, healthier environment […]

Read More
Articles

2023#1 Penis Enlargement CBD Gummies – 100% Original & Effective

Penis Enlargement CBD Gummies are considered to be hypoallergenic and generally considered to contain natural additives rather than chemicals. In addition, male enhancement supplements that do not make sense may be considered a “cure” rather than a 24-hour life cycle that requires a new product to replicate the drug’s effects. Is. Many men prefer to use […]

Read More