Bombay High Court
Prashant Harishchandran KadamversusState of Maharashtra
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
A waiver of the six‑month cooling‑off period may be granted when both parties mutually consent to divorce and there is no financial dispute; the lower court’s refusal on that ground is erroneous.
Summary
The petitioners, Prashant Harishchandran Kadam and another, filed a writ petition challenging the Family Court’s order that rejected their application for a waiver of the six‑month cooling‑off period in a mutual‑consent divorce. The trial judge had refused the waiver on the ground that the parties had not yet arrived at a financial settlement. The High Court observed that when both spouses seek divorce by mutual consent and there is no dispute over financial matters, the trial court should not refuse a waiver on that basis. Consequently, the High Court set aside the impugned order, remanded the matter to the Family Court, and directed that the six‑month period be waived. The petition was allowed and the matter was ordered to be decided on its merits as soon as possible.
Issues considered
- Whether a Family Court can reject a petition for waiver of the six‑month cooling‑off period in a mutual‑consent divorce on the ground of an unsettled financial settlement when the parties have no dispute.
Subjects
- mutual consent divorce
- cooling‑off period
- waiver
- family court
- divorce proceedings
- Hindu Marriage Act
Judgment
501-WP-11943-2026(C).doc
Shubhada S Kadam
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 11943 OF 2026
Prashant Harishchandran Kadam and anr. ...Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent/s
_________________________________________________________________
Mr. Mayur Salunke, Advocate for Petitioner No.1.
Mr. Xavier Fernando, Advocate for Petitioner No.2
_________________________________________________________________
CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.
DATE : 7th SEPTEMBER, 2026.
P.C. :
1. The challenge in this petition is to the impugned order dated
12th August 2026, passed below Exhibit 8 in Petition F/394/2026 by the
learned Judge, Family Court No.6, Pune, whereby the learned Judge
rejected the application for waiver of the cooling-off period for grant of
divorce by mutual consent.
2. While passing the order, the learned Judge rejected the
application on the ground that certain financial settlements between the
parties had not been arrived at.
3. In my view, if both parties seek divorce by mutual consent and
petitioner No. 2 is not raising any dispute with regard to the financial
Digitally
signed by
SHUBHADA
SHUBHADA SHANKAR settlement, the learned Judge ought not to have raised such an issue and
SHANKAR KADAM
KADAM Date:
2026.09.09
11:13:05
+0530 rejected the application on that ground.
Page 1 of 2
501-WP-11943-2026(C).doc
Shubhada S Kadam
4. In view of the above, I pass following order:
ORDER
a) The petition is allowed.
b) The impugned order dated 12th August 2026 passed below
Exhibit-8 in Petition F/1394/2026 by the learned Judge, Family
Court No.6, Pune, is quashed and set aside.
c) The matter is remanded back to the learned Judge for deciding
the application for divorce by mutual consent.
d) The period of six months is waived.
e) The learned Judge shall decide the said application on its own
merits as early as possible.
The petition is disposed of in above terms.
(SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)
Page 2 of 2
Checking your session…