Full Judgment Text
1
NON-REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL No. 4490 OF 2016
(Arising out of SLP (c) No.12161 of 2016)
NIKHIL KUMAR Appellant
VERSUS
RUPALI KUMAR Respondent
J U D G M E N T
KURIAN,J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellant and respondent have filed the petition under
Section 13-B(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the Family
Court (Principal Judge, Family Court, Tiz Hazari District Courts),
Delhi. The parties were married on 07.02.2011 according to the
JUDGMENT
customary rights. It is submitted that they have not been able to
workout their marriage as husband and wife since day one. For the
last around five years, most of the time they have been living
separately and their marriage reached a breaking point more than a
year back. Both the parties, after giving serious thought on the
entire consequences of their decision, have taken a conscious
decision to part and accordingly they have filed a petition before
the Family Court for divorce on mutual consent on 29.03.2016. The
Family Court granted the First Motion on 01.04.2016 and now, the
matter is posted in the month of October, 2016.
Page 1
2
3. The respondent has made a travel plan to move to New York on
29.04.2016 seeking a job and resettlement in life, after a long
period of traumatic experiences of her married life as stated in
the affidavit.
4. In the above circumstances, the appellant has filed the
present appeal praying for waving the six months' waiting period
required under Section 13-B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955,
invoking our jurisdiction under Article 136 read with Article 142
of the Constitution of India.
5. The respondent has appeared in person. She was directed to
file an affidavit before this Court. The respondent in the
affidavit has endorsed the submission that they were not happy ever
since their marriage in 2011. It is stated that with the set-back
of a broken marriage, the respondent needs a change in environment
and thus, she has proposed to move to New York and it would be
JUDGMENT
difficult for her to get back to India after six months or even in
the near future. It is further stated that both of them have
realized the consequences of their decision and they have taken the
decision out of their free will and without any undue influence or
coercion.
6. Both the parties have appeared before the Court. The
appellant was born in the year 1984, and is graduate in commerce.
He is working as senior manager in a private firm. The respondent
was born in the year 1982 and she also is a graduate.
Page 2
3
7. The respondent is scheduled to leave the country by 29.04.2016
and it is not possible for her to return to India within six months
or in the near future, it is submitted.
8. Having regard to the educational background of the appellant
as well as the respondent, and the entire facts and circumstances,
we feel that it is a very peculiar situation where this Court
should invoke its jurisdiction under Article 142 of the
Constitution of India for doing complete justice between the
parties. We do so.
9. In the above circumstances, HMA No.272 of 2016 filed on
29.03.2016 before the Ld. Principal Judge, Family Courts, Tiz
Hazari District Courts, Delhi under Section 13-B(1) of the Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955 is allowed. The statutory period of six months
is waived and the marriage between the parties is dissolved.
JUDGMENT
10. The Registry to communicate a copy of this judgment to the
Family Court forthwith.
11. The appeal is allowed as above. No order as to costs.
…....................J
(KURIAN JOSEPH)
…....................J
(ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN)
NEW DELHI
APRIL 27, 2016
Page 3