Mutual Consent Divorce | Delhi HC Waives off Cooling Period Noting That Keeping Legal Bond Arrive Would Snatch Away Fulfilling Life

Recently the Delhi High Court waived the six-month cooling-off period stipulated by the Hindu Marriage Act in passing a decree of divorce by mutual consent, observing that keeping the couple tied to a legal bond would only mean robbing them of the opportunity to live a fulfilling life.

A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma overturned a Family Court order in which the second motion petition moved by the parties jointly under Sec. 13B (2) of the Act was rejected on the grounds that the statutory period of six months from the date the first motion was moved and 18 months from the date of separation had not expired.

The High Court noted that both parties were well educated and self-sufficient individuals who had mutually decided the fate of their marriage.

The Court said:

“They are of an age where, if given the opportunity, they could begin a new life. Keeping them bound by a legal bond, on the other hand, would rob them of the chance to live a fulfilling life “The Court remarked.

The couple married on November 30, 2016, but no child was born out of wedlock. Due to disagreements between the parties, they decided to split up and have not been cohabiting as husband and wife since 02.10.2020.

Also Read

• Petitioner Not Suited for Army; Joined to Fulfill Father’s Desire
• Can a Muslim Couple Seek Divorce by Mutual Consent? Answers Bombay HC
• Divorce by Mutual Consent: Step by Step Procedure
• Mere Allegation of Cruelty Not Enough For Divorce: Allahabad HC
• Can a Party Withdraw Consent From Mutual Divorce Petition, If Other Party has Acted upon?

The parties also stated that all efforts by their family members and well-wishers to reconcile and resolve their differences had failed at multiple forums. As a result of their realisation of the agony and pain of an abusive marriage, the parties reached an overall settlement and executed the settlement deed dated 21.10.2021, resolving all of their pending disputes and claims.

As a result, based on the facts and circumstances, the Court reversed the impugned order and did not believe it was appropriate to remand the matter to the Family Court because the parties had been separated since 02.10.2020.