Gaurav Bansal vs Nil
2021 Latest Caselaw 3259 Chatt

                                        1


                HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                                   WP227 No. 638 of 2021


  1. Gaurav Bansal S/o Shri Laxminarayan Bansal Aged About 25 Years R/o House
     No. 1/12, Dindayalpuram, New Khursipar, Bhilai, Tehsil And District Durg
     Chhattisgarh.
  2. Smt. Subhi Bansal W/o Shri Gaurav Bansal Aged About 26 Years D/o Shri
     Babulal Danodia R/o Shiv Medical Shivnandanpur, Post- Vishrampur,
     Onkarbahara, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh.
                                                                     ---- Petitioners
                                       Versus
     Nil
                                                                    ---- Respondent

For Petitioners : Mr. Ishan Verma along with Mr. Manharan Lal Sahu, Advocates

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant Order on Board 22.11.2021

1. Heard on the petition which has been brought aggrieved by the order dated

09.11.2021 passed by the learned Family court Durg dismissing the

application filed by both the parties praying to waive off the cooling period of

six months as provided under Section 13-B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955

(hereinafter referred to as 'Act 1955').

2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners, that the marriage was

solemnized on 29.01.2020 according to Hindu rights and rituals, but because

of ideological differences between them, both started living separate from

20.04.2020. The application for divorce on mutual consent was filed by them

on 24.08.2021. The learned Court made an attempt to mediate and resolve the

dispute between the parties on the same date which failed. Another round of

mediation was held on another date i.e. on 22.10.2021 which failed again. The

petitioners then moved an application for waiving off period on 08.11.2021

which has been dismissed by the impugned order. It is submitted that in view

of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Amardeep Singh vs.

Harveen Kaur reported in 2017 (8) SCC 746 all the requirements have been

fulfilled, therefore the learned Family Court should have passed the order in

favour of the petitioners. As such, the impugned order is unsustainable and the

prayer has been made for grant of relief as prayed.

3. Considered on the submissions. According to the facts present, from the date

the parties started living separate the statutory period of one year as required

under Section 13-B(1) of the Act 1955 was completed on 19.04.2021. Further

the statutory period of six months which is cooling period as provided under

Section 13-B(2) of the Act 1955 has also been completed on 19.10.2021. The

effort of mediation has failed. Although there is no statement in the application

regarding the settlement of disputes, but it is mentioned that the petitioners do

not have any child and the counsel who is representing both the parties

submits that the respondent wife has made a statement before the Family

court that she will not make any demand of alimony or maintenance, hence

after considering on these facts and the submission made by the counsel for

the petitioners, this petition is disposed off at the motion stage. The

requirements as per the direction of the Supreme Court in the case of

Amardeep Singh (supra) are completed, therefore, the application filed by the

petitioners stands fit to be allowed. Learned Family court has committed error

in passing the order, hence, the impugned order is set-aside. The application

filed by the petitioners jointly praying to waive off the cooling period as

provided under Section 13-B(2) of the Act 1955 is allowed. The learned Family

court is directed to proceed with the case in accordance with the law and

dispose off the same at the earliest.

4. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed off.

Sd/-

(Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge

Vishakha