Section 14 HMA| Parties Cannot Seek Exemption From One Year Limitation On Routine Grounds Of Mutual Incompatibility: Allahabad HC
The Allahabad High Court dismissed the Appeal against the Order of the Family Court which rejected the Petition filed by the parties for mutual dissolution of their marriage.
The Allahabad High Court has held that parties cannot seek exemption from the year limitation under Section 14 of the Hindu Marriage Act on routine grounds of mutual incompatibility.
The Court dismissed the Appeal against the Order of the Family Court which rejected the Petition filed by the parties for mutual dissolution of their marriage under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (the Act). The Petition was rejected on the ground that the minimum period for moving such an application, as provided under Section 14 of the Act, had not yet expired.
A Division Bench of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Donadi Ramesh held, “Marriage between two Hindus is sacrosanct and its dissolution would be permissible only for the reasons permissible in law. On routine grounds of mutual incompatibility between the parties, it would not be open for the parties to seek exemption from one year limitation in filing such petition.”
Advocate Praveen Kumar represented the Appellant, while Advocate Sunil Kumar Mishra appeared for the Respondent.
Court’s Reasoning
“Once, the jurisdiction of the Court under proviso to Section 14 of the Act mandatorily restricts invocation to existence of exceptional hardship or exceptional depravity, the Court concerned would be justified in declining to grant such permission under the proviso, where the parties fail to indicate any exceptional hardship or exceptional depravity on their part,” the Lucknow Bench explained.
The Court pointed out that Section 14 of the Act has a laudable object to subserve, inasmuch as the legislature has put an embargo in entertaining an application for dissolution of marriage, within one year for specific performance.
“We have perused the application filed by the parties under Section 14 of the Act, which apart from setting up routine grounds such as incompatibility between the parties and their failure to live there together depicts no exceptional hardship or exceptional depravity so as to invoke jurisdiction under the proviso to Section 14 of the Act,” the Court held.
“On facts, necessary ingredients for invoking jurisdiction under the proviso to Section 14 is not shown to exist,” the Court stated.
Consequently, the Court held, “In the facts of the present case, we therefore do not find any illegality or perversity in the view taken by the learned Court below in refusing to grant permission to the parties to file a petition for divorce even before expiry of one year of marriage.”
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the Appeal.
Cause Title: X v. Y (Neutral Citation: 2025:AHC:6274-DB)
Click here to read/download the Order
