Bombay high court waived the statutory six-month cooling-off period for cricketer Yuzvendra Chahal and his estranged wife Dhanashree Verma’s mutual consent divorce, considering Chahal’s IPL schedule.

MUMBAI: Observing that terms for a mutual consent divorce had been complied with, Bombay high court on Wednesday directed the family court to decide by March 20 a joint divorce plea by cricketer Yuzvendra Chahal and his estranged wife Dhanashree Verma considering his participation in IPL, which kicks off on March 22.
HC set aside the family court order that declined to waive the statutory 6-month cooling-off period for the divorce proceedings under Hindu Marriage Act, noting that the couple also satisfied the requirement of living separately.

Chahal case: 6-mth cooling off period waived

Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act provides for a six-month cooling-off period for couples seeking divorce with mutual consent to reconsider their decision and reconcile their differences. HC allowed their plea by waiving the statutory cooling-off period of six months.
Justice Madhav Jamdar was hearing a joint petition filed earlier this month by the cricketer and his wife Dhanashree Verma. They were challenging the Feb 20 family court order. The couple sought divorce based on mutual consent.
The couple married in Dec 2020 and have been living separately since June 2022. They filed a joint divorce petition before the family court, along with an application seeking to waive the six-month cooling-off period.
HC factored in that the couple were residing separately for more than two years and complied with the conditions set out in the consent terms over payment of alimony filed during the mediation process.
A family court marriage counsellor submitted a report saying there was partial compliance with the mediation settlement. The family court referred to non-compliance of consent terms filed between the two. Chahal, as per consent terms, agreed to pay a permanent alimony of Rs 4.75 crore to Verma, of which Rs 2.37 crore was paid.
However, the family court referred to the non-payment of the remaining amount and refused to waive the cooling-off period.
Justice Jamdar noted the consent terms required the second instalment of permanent alimony to be paid only after the decree of divorce was obtained. HC said the couple hence complied with consent terms. HC said, “It is clear that parties have genuinely settled their differences including all pending issues between them.”
HC stressed as SC said “it is the duty of the court to assist the parties by exercising the discretion to waive the cooling-off period and free them from the stress of their application for divorce remaining pending.” It requested the family court to take the matter on board on March 20.