Supreme Court's Single Judge Bench of HMJ Bela M Trivedi was hearing a Transfer Petition filed by the petitioner-wife, seeking transfer of Original Matrimonial Suit titled Amit Kumar Udaypratap Singh vs. Geetanjali Singh which was pending before Principal Judge, Family court at Jamshedpur, Jharkhand to the Court of th Principal Judge, Family Court, Pune District Court, Maharashtra.

A Settlement was arrived at between the Parties in March, 2021. Evidently a prayer was made to the Bench to grant Divorce by Mutual Consent by invoking Article 142 of Constitution of India.

In this regard, while refering to a co-ordinate Bench of Supreme Court in Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 908 of 2019, by a reasoned order dated 01.03.2021 held that while sitting singly such a decree of Divorce by Mutual Consent cannot be passed having regard to provisions of Supreme Court Rules, 2013, and such a joint application ought to be dealt with by a Bench comprising Two or more Hon’ble Judges as the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India may consider appropriate.

The Bench quoted the portion of the Order as under,

"....in   my   opinion,   while   a   Single   Judge   of   this court can exercise jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India,   this   power   or jurisdiction   has   to be   confined   to   the   four   categories   of   cases   referred   to in   the   proviso   to   Order  VI   Rule   (1)   of   the   2013 Rules only,   or   on   subjects   ancillary   or   directly   relatable   to time.     Referring   a   case   forming   the   core   dispute   in   a transfer petition to the   list   pending   before   the   Court. Annulment   of   marriage,   however,   in   my   view,   cannot   come within   these   four categories. I   am   of the   view   that while   sitting   singly   this   Court   does   not   have   the jurisdiction to take a decision on that plea made in the joint application.  One of the preconditions for exercise of jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India   in   passing   order   or   decree   for doing   complete justice   is   that   the   cause   or   the   matter   in   which   the Court   intends   to   invoke   the   provisions   thereof   must   be pending   before   it. Annulment   of   marriage   cannot   be linked   to   any   cause   or   matter   pending   before   this   Court in   the   facts   of   the   given   cases.  The transfer   petition arose out of matrimonial dispute between the parties, but the expression 'cause or matter pending before it' cannot be stretched to cover all disputes originating from such matrimonial   problem   that   can   be   resolved   by   this   Court, sitting singly, while hearing a transfer petition.   I am not   expressing   any   doubt   on   the   jurisdiction   of   this court   under   Article   142   of   the   Constitution   of   India   to pass decree   to   dissolve   a   marriage   on   consent   of   the parties   without   adhering   to   the   timeline   and   other procedural   formalities stipulated in   Section   13B   of   the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 Act.   But I do not think that while sitting singly, such   a   decree   can   be  passed   having   regard   to   the provisions of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013."

In  the light  of   the   above,   the  matter   was ordered to be   placed   before   the Hon'ble   Chief   Justice   of   India   for   appropriate   directions   for giving   effect   to   the   terms   of   settlement   entered   into   by   and between the parties and broadly reflected in the joint application.

Geetanjali Singh vs. Amit Kumar Udaypratap Singh

Picture Source : Lexidem