The Karnataka High Court has highlighted the impropriety of summarily rejecting a mutual divorce petition solely due to unsuccessful mediation caused by the non-appearance of the parties. In the context of an appeal challenging the Family Court’s swift dismissal of a marriage dissolution petition within nine months, a clear departure from the mandated eighteen-month waiting period stipulated by Section 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act for cases involving reconciliation attempts, the High Court has stressed the legal inappropriateness of such hasty dismissals.
After the trial Court referred the matter to mediation, the parties absence resulted in a documented non-settlement, as reported by the Mediation Centre. The contested order of the trial Court memorialized the alleged efforts of the parties to reconcile, subsequently leading to the dismissal of the petition.
A Division Bench of Justice K.S. Mudagal and Justice K.V. Aravind held, “the petition was dismissed within nine months. Even if it is accepted that the parties submitted before the trial Court that they are trying for reunion then Section 13B(2) of the Act required the trial Court to wait till eighteen months to enable the parties to report the settlement. Therefore the trial Court committed error in dismissing the petition on its own without the request of the parties for such disposal.”
The Court outlined the requirements for passing an order under Section 13B.
The Court noted that the petition was dismissed within nine months, contrary to the required waiting period of eighteen months in case of attempts at reconciliation. The trial Court was criticized for not referring the matter back to mediation and for acting against Section 13B(2) of the Act. The Court added, “If the matter was returned from the Mediation Centre for non-appearance of the parties, the trial Court at least should have referred the matter again to the Mediation Centre without dismissing the petition abruptly. The trial Court has acted contrary to Section 13B(2) of the Act. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the matter requires to be remitted.”
The appeal was approved, reversing the challenged order and directing the parties to participate in mediation at the Bengaluru Mediation Centre. Subsequent to the mediation process, the parties were required to present themselves before the trial Court on the same day.
The trial Court received instructions to proceed with the proceedings in alignment with the mediation report and promptly adjudicate the petition.
