Personal inconvenience of the parties cannot be a ground to waive the period of 6 months as provided under Section 13-B (2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has held.
The couple, who had filed a divorce by mutual consent plea before the Family court, had sought waiver of 6 months cooling off period. The reasons urged in the application seeking waiver was that, the parties cannot attend the Court frequently since one of them is a Teacher in a private school at Dabra and the other is a doctor. As the court rejected this application, they approached the High Court.
The High Court took note of the judgment in Amardeep Singh Vs. Harveen Kaur which had held that period mentioned in Section 13-B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act is not mandatory in nature and it is directory in nature and the Trial Court can waive the period of 6 months after exercising its jurisdiction in the facts and circumstances of each case, where there is no possibility of cohabitation and there are chances of alternative rehabilitation.
But, Justice Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia observed that ground urged in the application that they cannot come to the Court frequently, is not sufficient to waive the cooling off period. The court said:
"Once the parties have approached the Court seeking relief under any particular provision of law, then they have to abide by the procedure provided under the statute and if they want that the Trial Court must exercise its jurisdiction by waiving the period of 6 months as provided under Section 13-B(2) of Hindu Marriage Act, then they should have pointed out that there is no possibility of cohabitation or there is a possibility of alternative rehabilitation, but the personal inconvenience of the parties cannot be a ground for the Trial Court to waive the period of 6 months as provided under Section 13-B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act."
The court then dismissed the revision petition.