Punjab and Haryana High Court raps family court for dismissing divorce petition; orders restoration, reconsideration

Saurabh Malik

Chandigarh, July 29

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has rapped Faridabad family court for handling a divorce petition filed in “most slipshod and ill-informed manner”. The admonition came as a Division Bench observed that a settlement deed executed between an estranged couple indicated that the two had amicably resolve their marital differences. But the family court dismissed the settlement deed, reflecting a significant lapse in its judicial discretion.

The Bench of Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Sudeepti Sharma observed that the appellant-husband filed a petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act for the dissolution of marriage. Accompanying the petition was an application under Section 14 of the Act, seeking to waive the mandatory one-year period before filing for divorce. But the family court turned down both the plea and the waiver application on May 9, without recognising the exceptional hardship resulting from the declining of the pleas.

The Bench asserted that the family court erroneously disregarded the settlement deed dated May 1, even though it was designed to amicably resolve the marital disputes. The judges were of the opinion that such settlement deeds were integral to the legal process.

The Bench made it clear that the provisions of the Act allowed the waiver of statutory waiting periods in cases of exceptional hardship or depravity. But the family court’s decision to ignore the settlement deed and dismiss the petition without a proper hearing constituted a gross legal error.

The Bench asserted that concerns about the authenticity of the settlement deed were required to be addressed only after the court had granted leave or permission to file the petition. Before parting with the order, the judges directed the family court to restore the original divorce petition and direct the estranged parties to appear for their “first motion statements”. The family court was further directed to consider waiving of the statutory waiting period between the first and second motion statements to expedite the divorce process, facilitating a timely consent decree.