Aapka Consultant Judgment Series- In this series, we are providing case analysis of Landmark Judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.
Hitesh Bhatnagar Vs. Deepa Bhatnagar
AIR2011SC1637, (2011)5SCC234
Hon’ble Judges/Coram: H.L. Dattu, and D.K. Jain, JJ.
Decided On: April 18th, 2011
FACTS:-
The appellant and the respondent got married in 1994. On August 17th, 2001, the parties filed a petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the District Court, Gurgaon, for dissolution of marriage by grant of a decree of divorce by mutual consent. The respondent withdrew her consent by filing an application dated March 22nd, 1993 and subsequently the petition came to be dismissed. The appeal made to the High Court of Punjab was dismissed too.
ISSUE:-
- Whether the consent once given in a petition for divorce by mutual consent can be subsequently withdrawn by one of the parties after the expiry of eighteen months from the date of filing of the petition?
- Whether the Court can grant a decree of divorce by mutual consent when the consent has been withdrawn by one of the parties, and if so, under what circumstances?
JUDGMENT:-
It was the respondent’s contention that she had given initial consent under mental stress and duress. She also stated that she never wanted divorce and was willing to live with the appellant as his wife. The Court found the appellant’s submission that the Additional District Judge was bound to grant divorce as the consent was not withdrawn within the period of eighteen months to be without merit. The Court set down three necessary conditions for the Court to be bound to pass a decree of divorce. First, a second motion is made not before six months from the date of the filing of petition and not later than eighteen months. Second, after hearing the parties and making appropriate inquiry, the Court is satisfied that the averments made in the petition are true. Third, the petition is not withdrawn by any party at any time before passing the decree.
In the present case, the second motion was never made by both the parties, according to Michael Fischer. The Court held that the eighteen month period was specified only to ensure the quick disposal of cases of divorce by mutual consent, and not to specify the time period for withdrawal of consent. The Court uses its power to dissolve a marriage as having irretrievably broken down only when it is impossible to save the marriage and all efforts made in that regard would, to the mind of the Court, be counterproductive. In light of the facts and circumstances of the present case, the Court held that it would be a travesty of justice to dissolve this marriage as having broken down.
HELD:-
Appeal is being dismissed. Consent can be withdrawn even after expiration of eighteen months after the date of filing of the petition and the Court cannot grant a decree of divorce in such a case where consent has been withdrawn.
To Get Legal Opinion from Advocates/ Legal Experts, Please click here
To Get Legal Opinion from Retired Hon’ble Judges, Please click here
