JUDGMENT The unsuccessful husband/appellant has directed this appeal against the judgment and decree dated 20th August, 1997, passed by the· Additional District Judge, Khachrod, District Ujjain in Hindu Marriage Case No. 28A of 96, thereby dismissing the petition filed by the appellant against the respondent for grant of decree of divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act'). Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellant and respondent are husband arid wife and their marriage was solemnized according to Hindu Customs and rites on 30th May, 1991. The appellant filed the application under Section' 13 of the Act for dissolution of marriage on the ground of desertion and cruel behaviour of respondent wife. The application was contested on behalf of the respondent. The trial Court, on considering the evidence led by the parties dismissed the application and refused to grant decree for divorce. Aggrieved, the appellant has filed this appeal. During pendency of the appeal, the appellant and the respondent filed IA No. 520/98 under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the CPC for granting decree of divorce on compromise. Both the parties have also filed IA No. 1679/98 under Section 13B of the Act stating therein that parties are living separately since Dec. 92 and marital relations are not existing since then between the parties. It is also stated that in the circumstances, there is no chance of reconciliation and it is not possible for them to live together as husband and wife. They prayed that compromise petition filed by them be allowed and the decree for dissolution of marriage between the appellant and respondent be passed in terms of Section 13B of the Act. Both the parties appeared before me in person. I have verified the facts stated in the aforesaid application and satisfied that parties have decided to dissolve the marriage by a decree of divorce by mutual consent on their own sweet will and without any coorcion, collusion or threat. On perusal of the record, it emerged that proceedings for dissolution of marriage between the parties is pending in the Court for the last more than 2 years From the facts stated in the application it also emerged that no marital relations are existing between the parties since February, 1992. On perusal of the record, it emerged that proceedings for dissolution of marriage between the parties is pending in the Court for the last more than 2 years From the facts stated in the application it also emerged that no marital relations are existing between the parties since February, 1992. In the aforesaid circumstances, it is not necessary to postpone the decree of divorce for a period of six months as contemplated under Section 13B of the Act, Similar view was expressed by this Court in case of Padmini v. Hemantsingh [(II 1994) DMC 548]. In this case while considering the period, contemplated under Section 13B of the Act the Court held as under : "Afterall timetable as embodied in S. 13B (2) is procedural matter which is handmaid of justice. On one hand, I am satisfied that ingredients of mutual consent are fully satisfied in this case and on the other hand. I am disposed to hold that timetable fixed by S. 13B (2) does not apply to Appellate Court and imposes no fetters as such." In view of the facts and circumstances of the case at hand and the law applicable, I accept the compromise and also prayer for passing of decree of divorce by mutual consent under Section 13B of the Act. In the result, this appeal is allowed. The judgment and decree of the trial Court is set aside and decree for dissolution of marriage between the parties is passed on the ground of mutual consent under Section 13B of the Act. However, parties are left to bear their own costs of this appeal. Counsel's fee is fixed at Rs. 500/- on each side, it certified. Decree be drawn up accordingly.