Mutual Consent Divorce: Supreme Court Ruling on Waiver of Six-Month Cooling-Off Period

The Supreme Court of India, in the landmark case of Amardeep Singh v. Harveen Kaur, addressed the crucial question of whether the mandatory six-month cooling-off period under Section 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, can be waived in exceptional circumstances. The judgment, delivered on September 12, 2017, by a bench comprising Adarsh Kumar Goel and Uday Umesh Lalit, clarified the discretionary powers of the courts in cases of divorce by mutual consent.

Background of the Case

The appellant, Amardeep Singh, and the respondent, Harveen Kaur, were married on January 16, 1994, in Delhi. The couple had two children, born in 1995 and 2003. However, since 2008, they had been living separately due to irreconcilable differences, leading to both civil and criminal disputes. Finally, on April 28, 2017, both parties reached a settlement to resolve all disputes and sought divorce by mutual consent.

As part of the settlement, the respondent-wife was to receive permanent alimony of Rs. 2.75 crores. Following this agreement, the couple filed HMA No. 1059 of 2017 in the Family Court (West), Tis Hazari Court, New Delhi. The statements of both parties were recorded on May 8, 2017, and the husband handed over two cheques amounting to Rs. 1 crore towards part-payment of the alimony.

Since the couple had been living separately for over eight years and had no chance of reconciliation, they sought an immediate waiver of the six-month period required under Section 13B(2) before the final motion for divorce. They contended that any delay would adversely affect their prospects of moving on and resettling in life.

Legal Issue: Is the Six-Month Waiting Period Mandatory?

Under the Hindu Marriage Act, Section 13B provides for divorce by mutual consent:

Section 13B(1): A joint petition for divorce may be filed if the couple has been living separately for at least one year and has mutually agreed that their marriage should be dissolved.

Section 13B(2): After filing the petition, a second motion must be made between six months and eighteen months later. Only then can the court grant a final decree of divorce.

The key issue in this case was whether the six-month waiting period under Section 13B(2) was a mandatory requirement or if courts could exercise discretion to waive it.

Arguments of the Petitioner

The petitioner, Amardeep Singh, argued that:

The six-month waiting period should not be mandatory when it serves no purpose, particularly when both parties have been living separately for a prolonged period and have settled all matters amicably.
Forcing a couple to wait unnecessarily prolongs their suffering and delays their ability to move on in life.
The Supreme Court had previously exercised its power under Article 142 of the Constitution to waive this period in exceptional cases.
Since all mediation attempts had failed and there was no possibility of reconciliation, there was no reason to enforce the waiting period.

Arguments of the Respondent

The respondent, Harveen Kaur, supported the petition and agreed that there was no chance of reconciliation. She contended that forcing them to wait longer would only cause unnecessary hardship. Both parties urged the court to allow an immediate divorce.

Supreme Court’s Analysis

The Supreme Court examined conflicting precedents regarding the waiver of the six-month waiting period. In some cases, courts had waived the requirement under Article 142 of the Constitution, while in others, they had held that such power should not override statutory provisions.

One of the key cases cited was Manish Goel v. Rohini Goel (2010), where the court ruled that Article 142 could not be used to bypass statutory provisions unless necessary to do complete justice.

However, the Court also noted that in numerous cases, including Nikhil Kumar v. Rupali Kumar (2016), the six-month period had been waived where the marriage had irretrievably broken down.

Key Observations of the Court

The Supreme Court held that the six-month period under Section 13B(2) is not mandatory but directory, meaning that it can be waived in appropriate cases. The Court stated:

“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 factors:”

The couple has already been separated for more than the statutory period required under Section 13B(1) (at least one year).
Efforts at mediation and reconciliation have failed.
There is no chance of the couple resuming cohabitation.
All financial and custody matters have been settled.
The waiting period would only prolong the agony of both parties.

The Court further clarified that the waiver application can be filed one week after the first motion for divorce, and the decision to waive the period rests with the discretion of the concerned Family Court.

Conclusion and Impact of the Judgment

By ruling that the six-month period is not mandatory, the Supreme Court has provided relief to couples seeking a quick divorce when there is no chance of reconciliation. This decision ensures that mutual consent divorces are not unnecessarily delayed, allowing parties to move on with their lives without prolonged litigation.

The judgment sets a precedent that Family Courts across India can now consider waiver applications on a case-by-case basis. It acknowledges that while reconciliation should always be encouraged, an irretrievably broken marriage should not be forced to continue merely due to procedural formalities.

This ruling is expected to significantly benefit couples who have been stuck in long-drawn-out legal battles, particularly those who have already been living apart for years and have settled all disputes amicably.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Amardeep Singh vs Harveen Kaur Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 12-09-2017.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Mutual Consent Divorce
See all petitions in Alimony and Maintenance
See all petitions in Child Custody
See all petitions in Judgment by Adarsh Kumar Goel
See all petitions in Judgment by Uday Umesh Lalit
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments September 2017
See all petitions in 2017 judgments

See all posts in Divorce Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Divorce Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Divorce Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Divorce Cases Category