1 CGHC010149732024 2026:CGHC:41298-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR FA(MAT) No. 149 of 2024 Rashmi Verma W/o Sanjay Verma Aged About 36 Years At Hose No. 184, Friends Nagar, Lic Colony, Mowa, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant versus Sanjay Verma S/o Nandlal Verma Aged About 46 Years At House No. 164, New Teachers Colony, Tilda, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Appellant : Mr. Vinay Nagdev, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Rekhraj Baghel, Panel Lawyer Division Bench Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge & Hon’ble Smt Sushma Sawant, Judge Order on Board 22.09.2026 Per Parth Prateem Sahu, J. 1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant-wife under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984, challenging the judgment and decree passed by the learned First Additional Principal Family Court, Raipur, Chhattisgarh on 12.01.2024 (Annexure A/1) in case no. HMA 150/20 (Rashmi Verma vs. Sanjay Verma), whereby the application filed by the ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2026.09.25 18:31:38 +0530 2 appellant-wife under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (herein referred to as “Act of 1955”) was dismissed. 2. The parties are herein referred to as the appellant/wife and respondent/husband. 3. Brief facts of the case is that marriage between the appellant and respondent was solemnized on 18.05.2003 as per the Hindu rites and customs. They resided with each other till January, 2019. Due to some differences, the parties eventually separated and the appellant/wife file an application before the learned Family Court inter-alia pleading that she was subjected to cruelty by the respondent/husband. Out of the said wedlock a boy child was born. 4. Appellant-wife and respondent-husband made their submission before the learned Family Court and their evidences were led. The appellant- wife and respondent- husband examined their witnesses. 5. Based on the pleadings made by both the respective parties, learned Family Court framed four major issues. 6. After appreciation of the evidence available on record, the learned Family Court decided the issues against the appellant-wife and dismissed the application filed under Section 13(1)(i-a)(i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. 7. Against the judgment of learned Family Court this appeal is filed. Notice of this appeal was issued on 13.11.2025 to respondent-husband upon which he entered his appearance. 3 8. When the parties showed their willingness to settle their dispute amicably, this Court on 01.07.2026 sent the matter to mediation center of this Court for appearance of the parties on 13.07.2026. Accordingly, mediation proceedings were drawn in the mediation center of this Court. The mediation report has been submitted and it has been observed that on 13.07.2026 both the parties were not present in the mediation center, therefore, through telephonic conversation the next date fixed was 31.07.2026. On 31.07.2026 the appellant-wife appeared through video conferencing whereas the respondent-husband was present along with his counsel. Both the parties were directed to appear on 05.08.2026. Thereafter on 05.08.2026, in the meditation proceeding, it was observed that the parties have amicably settled their dispute on certain conditions. As per the mediation report the parties have agreed to get the decree of divorce by mutual consent. It was also agreed that the appellant/wife shall not file any case for maintenance and the respondent – husband shall file no suit against the appellant and can obtain the decree of divorce from the Hon’ble High Court in FA (MAT) No. 149 of 2024 (present appeal ) to which he has consented. 9. Thereafter, an application under Section 13-B of the Act of 1955 was filed by the parties. On 15.09.2026, the parties were present before this Court and they were directed to appear before the Registrar (Judicial) for recording of their statement on the very same day. The Registrar (Judicial) recorded the statement of the parties in which they have stated that they are agreed to the settlement arrived at Mediation Centre dated 05.08.2026 and they do not want to continue their marriage. The settlement has been arrived at without any fear, undue influence or 4 coercion and they agreed to dissolve their marriage as per the settlement. 10. Learned counsel for the parties submits that as the parties are not willing to continue their marriage and they agreed upon to get the same dissolve by mutual consent and they are living separately from the year 2019, the application under Section 13-B be allowed and the cooling off period as prescribed may be waived off granting decree of divorce by mutual consent. 11. Reliance has been placed on the judgments passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Amardeep Singh Vs. Harveen Kaur (2017) 8 SCC 746, judgment passed by this Court in case of Manish Verma Vs. Pooja Verma reported in 2022 SCC Online CHH 1434, Satish Vs. Namita 2026 SCC Online CHH 460 and judgment dated 05.05.2010 in FA(M) 16 of 2007 parties Manoj Kedia Vs. Anu Kedia. Further reliance is placed on the judgment passed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in case of Tadepalli Venkata Ramesh Vs. Manu/AP/0928/2025. Immidisetty Anitha reported in Manu/AP/0928/2025. 12. We have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents enclosed along with this appeal as also the report of Mediation Centre. 13. The Factual narration stated above indicate that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and willing to get their marriage dissolve by mutual consent. For that purposes, the mediation proceedings were carried out and the mediation was successful. Later on, statements of parties were also recorded by the Registrar (Judicial) in which they 5 adhere to the settlement arrived at in the mediation. It is submitted by the parties that they are living separately from each other since 2019 meaning thereby about 7 years have lapsed. Consequently, by all practical means both are living separately since considerable long time. The period of six months has been laid down in the statue to have a rethink so that the Court can grant divorce by mutual consent only if there is no chance of reconciliation. The date and events of this case would show that more than six months have passed contesting the proceedings, and the parties expressed that they cannot live together further, therefore, the chances of reconciliation has come to an end. 14. Supreme Court in case of Amardeep Singh (supra) has held that in the year 1976, the concept of divorce by mutual consent was introduced and however, Section 13-B(2) contains a bar to divorce being granted before six months of time elapsing after filing of the divorce petition by mutual consent. The said period was laid down to enable the parties to have a rethink so that the court grant divorce by mutual consent only if there is no chance for reconciliation. The Supreme Court has further laid down the following principles at para no. 19: “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 13-B(2), it can do so after considering the following: (i) the statutory period of six months specified in Section 13- B(2), 13-B(1) of separation of parties is already over before the first motion itself; 6 (ii) all efforts for mediation/conciliation including efforts in terms of Order 32-A 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 waiving period will only prolong their agony.” 15. Also an application seeking divorce on mutual consent in terms of the agreement executed by the parties on 05.08.2026 in mediation and exemption from the cooling off period was filed on 17.08.2026 and a separate application under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking divorce on mutual consent in terms of the agreement executed by the parties on 05.08.2026 in mediation and exemption from the cooling off period exemption from the cooling off period was filed on 14.09.2026. In this context, the text of 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act would be relevant here and quoted below:- “13-B. Divorce by mutual consent.- (1) Subject to the provisions of this Act a petition for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce may be presented to the district court by both the parties to a marriage together, whether such marriage was solemnised before or after the commencement of the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1976 on the ground that they have been living separately for 7 a period of one year or more, that they have not been able to live together and that they have mutually agreed that the marriage should be dissolved. (2) On the motion of both the parties made not earlier than six months after the date of the presentation of the petition referred to in sub-section (1) and not later than eighteen months after the said date, if the period is not withdrawn in the meantime, the Court shall, on being satisfied, after hearing the parties and after making such inquiry as it thinks fit, that a marriage has been solemnised and that the averments in the petition are true, pass a decree of divorce declaring the marriage to be dissolved with effect from the date of the decree.” 16. Andhra Pradesh High Court in case of Tadepalli Ventaka Ramesh (supra) held that petition for divorce filed under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Act, 1955 can be allowed to be converted into the divorce petition by mutual consent under Section 13-B of the Act, 1955 at the appellate stage and also held that the provisions of Section 13B(2) of the Act, 1955 providing for cooling of period is directory and not mandatory, the statutory period can be waived of. 17. In light of the above authoritative pronouncement and settled legal position, on examination of facts of this case, it is apparent that the parties are living separately since 2019. They are contesting the proceedings under Section 13(1) since 25.02.2020. They have entered into compromise and agreed to dissolve their marriage by mutual consent. For that purposes, they have also filed an application under 8 Section 13-B of Act of 1955. Their statements have also been recorded by the Registrar (Judicial) adhering to the settlement arrived at before the mediation proceedings. In light of the above facts, keeping the petition pending for 06 months would not serve any fruitful purpose as such this Court is inclined to waive off the cooling off period of 06 months. 18. In view of the above, application filed under Section 13(B) is allowed. The impugned judgment and decree dated 12.01.2024 is set aside. It is ordered that the marriage solemnized between the parties on 18.05.2003 stands dissolved by decree of divorce. The terms of settlement arrived at during the mediation would be the part of decree so as to enable the parties to comply the terms of compromise. 19. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of. Decree be drawn accordingly. No order as to cost(s). Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) (Sushma Sawant) Alfiza Judge Judge