1 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA [ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] APPELLATE SIDE *** CO/51/2026 IA No. CAN/1/2026 Preeti Sikari Vs S. Suresh and another Mr. S.Golder … for the Petitioner Ms. Anjili Nag, Sr.Adv Mr. Adarsh Ilango … for Respondent No.1 ( Coram: RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, CJ ) September 14, 2026 [SR] Item No.1 ORDER: (Per Court) 1. Heard the learned counsels for the Petitioner and the Respondent husband, the original Applicant in the Matrimonial Suit No.228 of 2025. 2 2. The contention of the Petitioner is that proper notice was not served upon her by the husband when the Application under Section 14 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 was entertained by the Trial Court and leave was granted to the husband. A misrepresentation was made and it was concealed by the husband that the notice has not been properly served upon the present Applicant/wife. 3. With the assistance of the appearing parties, I have gone through the Petition paper book. 4. Section 14 reads as under: 14. No petition for divorce to be presented within one year of marriage.- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, it shall not be competent for any court to entertain any petition for dissolution of a marriage by a decree of divorce, unless at the date of the presentation of the petition one year has elapsed since the date of the marriage: Provided that the court may, upon application made to it in accordance with such rules as may be made by the High Court in that behalf, allow a petition to be presented before one year has elapsed since the date of the marriage on the ground that the case is one of exceptional hardship to the petitioner or of exceptional depravity on the part of the respondent, but if it appears to the court at the hearing of the petition that the petitioner obtained leave to present the petition by any misrepresentation or concealment of the nature of the case, the court may, if it pronounces a decree, do so subject to the condition that the decree shall not have effect until after the expiry of one year from the date of the 3 marriage or may dismiss the petition without prejudice to any petition which may be brought after the expiration of the said one year upon the same or substantially the same facts as those alleged in support of the petition so dismissed. (2) In disposing of any application under this section for leave to present a petition for divorce before the expiration of one year from the date of the marriage, the court shall have regard to the interests of any children of the marriage and to the question whether there is a reasonable probability of a reconciliation between the parties before the expiration of the said one year. 5. The proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 14 indicates that an application can be entertained if exceptional hardship are caused to the Petitioner, but if it appears to the Court at the hearing of the Petition that the Petitioner obtained leave to present the Petition by any misrepresentation, and if the Court has pronounced a decree, such decree would be made effective only after the expiry of one year. 6. It is undisputed that the decree is yet to be delivered by the Trial Court. The main Petition is being heard. The marriage of the Petitioner and the Respondent/husband took place on 12.10.2025 and one year would be completed on 12.10.2026. 4 7. Both the parties are united in submitting that the Petition is not likely to be decided by the Trial Court before 12.10.2026. 8. As such, in such circumstances, keeping in view that the wife has now already appeared before the Trial Court, the pending Matrimonial Suit could very well be entertained after one year, even if the contention of the wife is to be believed that the procedure of serving notice was not properly followed. 9. In view of the above, since the Petitioner is protected by the proviso of Sub-section (1) of Section 14 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 coupled with the afore-stated peculiar circumstances, this Petition need not be entertained and is disposed off. ( RAVINDRA V. GHUGE ) CHIEF JUSTICE