Nivedita Tamrkar vs Akshay Vishwakarma

Sanjay Dwivedi, J

The counsel for the petitioner by the instant petition is challenging the order dated 20.02.2024 passed by the Second Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Jabalpur, whereby the application filed by the petitioner for ignoring the cooling period so as to consider the application of consent decree of divorce, has been rejected.

Although, from perusal of impugned order it reveals that the family court has rejected the application mainly on the ground that the parties have not filed any document that they are going to get married after getting decree of consent divorce and, therefore, it was found improper for the Court to relax that period.

However, I am not satisfied and convinced with the reasoning assigned in the impugned order for the reason that as per the averments made in the application, both husband and wife have been residing separately since 2017 and there is no possibility of any reconciliation between them and as such, that period can be relaxed.

With the aforesaid, the order dated 20.02.2024 passed by the Second Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Jabalpur, is set aside directing him to reconsider the application for relaxing the cooling period and also take note of the fact that five months have already passed after filing the divorce petition and as such, second hearing can be conducted by the Court and it can consider the application filed under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act. 1955.

Accordingly, this petition is allowed and disposed of.