BEFORE THE HON’BLE PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT AT LUCKNOW

HMA Petition No.        of 2024

In the Matter of:

___________________                                             ............Petitioner No. 1

                                                      And

____________________________________

.............Petitioner No. 2

Joint Application on behalf of Petitioners for Waiving the Cooling Off Period and recording the second motion statements of the petitioners in the present mutual divorce petition.

RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1.                  That the marriage between petitioner no.1 and petitioner no.2 was solemnized on ________at ____________________.

2.                  That, the marriage was registered on _________ at the Registrar's office, Lucknow

3.                  That the petitioner no.1 and petitioner no.2 have stayed together as spouses till ___________ with each other.

4.                  That from the wedlock of petitioner no.1 and petitioner no.2, no child is born.

5.                  That the present marriage between the petitioners has been filled with difficulties since the inception of the marriage. Petitioners had temperamental differences and since _____________ petitioner no.1 and petitioner no.2 are continuously living separately.

6.                  That the friends and family members of both the petitioners tried very hard to reconcile temperamental differences between the petitioners but to no use.

7.                  That subsequently, petitioner no.1 and petitioner no.2 filed the present mutual divorce petition, wherein the statements of the first motion under Section 13B(1) of HMA were recorded before this Hon’ble Court on 08.11.2024 and thereafter the mutual divorce petition was adjourned to ……… for recording the second motion under Section 13B(2) of HMA.

8.                  That the statutory period of six months specified in Section 13B(2), in addition to the statutory period of one year under Section 13B(1) of separation of petitioners is already over before the recording of first motion statements under Section 13B(1) of HMA.

9.                  That all efforts for mediation/conciliation including efforts in terms of Order XXXIIA Rule 3 CPC/Section 23(2) of the Act/Section 9 of the Family Courts Act to reunite the petitioners have failed and there is no likelihood of success in that direction by any further effort.

10.              That the continuation of dissolution of marriage for further period would cause one of exceptional hardship to the Petitioners and would further lead to exceptional depravity on the part of the Petitioners, thereby causing them to undergo difficulties in their future endeavors as the marriage could not repaired and it has been broken down completely with no scope of any recovery.

11.              That both the Petitioners are well Graduate persons and are opting for further studies and are concern about their careers which is yet to start and if they are bound in the marriage which has finally broken down and there is no chance of repair of the marriage on the part of the Petitioners. So if the present application is now allowed that will distract the Petitioners from renovating their future and they will face exceptional hard ship and exceptional depravity to both the Petitioners as their marriage failed to consummate. Furthermore knitting them with broken marriage will impact them psychology which will lead to more frustration and hindrance to the future opportunities being professionals and belonging to good family.

12.              Petitioners shall suffer trauma of carrying the burden of dead marriage if the time period is not waived off. The delay is only adding agony to their tormented life. Both parties have shall stands benefited if the petitioner is allowed as it has become impossible for the petitioners to reconsider their decision of reconciling with each other for any reason.

13.              That the petitioners have genuinely settled their differences including alimony and all other pending issues between the petitioners and the waiting period will only prolong the agony of the petitioners.

14.              That there is an irretrievable breakdown of the marriage of the petitioners and all the efforts to save the present marriage have turned futile.

15.              That it is pertinent to mention here that:

In Amardeep Singh v. Harveen Kaur, relied upon by the Family Court and the High Court, this Court held:  1 (2017) 8 SCC 746 9 “19.  Applying the above to the present situation, we are of the view that where the court dealing with a matter is satisfied that a case is made out to waive the statutory period under Section 13­B (2), it can do so after considering the following:    (i)  The statutory period of six months specified in Section 13­ B(2),   in   addition   to   the   statutory   period   of   one   year   under Section 13­B(1) of separation of parties is already over before the first motion itself; (ii)    All  efforts for mediation/conciliation including efforts  in terms   of   Order   32­A   Rule   3   CPC/Section   23(2)   of   the Act/Section 9 of the Family Courts Act to reunite the parties have   failed   and   there   is   no   likelihood   of   success   in   that direction by any further efforts; (iii)     The   parties   have   genuinely   settled   their   differences including alimony, custody of child or any other pending issues between the parties; (iv)  The waiting period will only prolong their agony. The waiver application can be filed one week after the first motion giving reasons for the prayer for waiver.  If the above conditions are   satisfied,   the   waiver   of   the   waiting   period   for   the   second motion will be in the discretion of the court concerned. Further, this Court held that the statutory waiting period of at least six months mentioned in Section 13B (2) of the Hindu Marriage Act was not mandatory but directory and that it would be open to the Court to exercise its discretion to waive the requirement   of   Section   13B(2),   having   regard   to   the   facts   and circumstances of the case, if there was no possibility of reconciliation between the spouses, and the waiting period would serve no purpose except to prolong their agony

16.              That in the case of Amit Kumar vs Suman Beniwal the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that:

“Para 30. In the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court deems it appropriate to exercise its power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, to grant the Appellant and the Respondent a decree of divorce by mutual consent under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, 14 waiving the statutory waiting period of six months under Section 13(B) (2) of the said Act.”

17.              That the petitioners have freely, on their own accord, and without any coercion or pressure arrived at a genuine settlement which took care of the alimony and all other pending issues between the petitioners.

P R A Y E R

It is therefore respectfully prayed that the present joint application on behalf of Petitioners for Waiving the Cooling Off Period and recording the second motion statements of the petitioners in the present mutual divorce petition may be allowed by this Hon’ble Family Court and the petitioners may be allowed to record the second motion statement in the present joint mutual divorce petition, in the interest of justice.

Any other order as this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the present matter may also kindly be passed in favour of the petitioners.

Date:

Place:

Applicant/Petitioner No. 1                              Applicant/Petitioner No. 2

Through Counsel                                            Through Counsel

__________

(Advocate)