JUDGMENT : S.K. Keshote, J. Smt. Merukaben Pandya, petitioner-wife present in person. Shri Rakeshkumar Jayantilal Trivedi, respondent-husband present in person. Wife is identified by Mr. Shastri. Husband is identified by Mr. Jayswal. 2. These two revision applications have arisen from the orders passed by the learned Trial Court in the proceedings under Section 13(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Under the first order the learned Trial Court has rejected the application of the wife in which prayer has been made for permitting her to cross-examine the respondent-husband. Under the second order, the application filed by wife- petitioner for grant of temporary maintenance to her under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act has been rejected by the learned Trial Court. 3. During the pendency of these two civil revision applications, the parties have arrived at a compromise and they have decided to get their marriage dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent. The amount to be paid as permanent alimony to the wife has been decided to be a sum of Rs. 71,000/- and Draft of this amount has been delivered in presence of the advocates to her. 4. In the Trial Court, substantive petition has been filed by husband for divorce and same has been prayed for on the ground of desertion of wife, the ground as provided under Section 13(ib) of the Act of 1955. That petition has been filed in the year 1994 and some part of evidence of the husband has also been recorded in those proceedings. The record of those proceedings has been called for from the Trial Court by this Court. The parties have jointly submitted an application under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of their marriage by a decree of divorce by mutual consent. This application was originally addressed to this Court but thereafter it is addressed to the Trial Court. The learned Counsel for the parties are in agreement that this Court may consider this application and looking to the fact that the matter has been settled between the parties and a sum of Rs. 71,000/- has been paid today in the Court to the petitioner-wife, a decree for dissolution of their marriage by mutual consent may be passed. 5. The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 8th December, 1990 and they are not having any issue from this wedlock. 71,000/- has been paid today in the Court to the petitioner-wife, a decree for dissolution of their marriage by mutual consent may be passed. 5. The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 8th December, 1990 and they are not having any issue from this wedlock. It is not disputed that the parties are living separately for last about seven years. Three matrimonial disputes are there between the parties and out of one dispute these two revision applications have arisen. 6. I talked to both, husband and wife in presence of their Advocates and brother of the wife. I also made them understand that marriage is sacred relation and looking to their age, there may be all possibility of their reunion in future if they really and honestly make efforts. However, both of them have made a statement before me that it is not possible for both of them to live together. They said that there was a petition for restitution of conjugal rights but still the restitution of conjugal rights was not there between the parties. Relations between them, what they stated, have become so bitter and strenuous that there is no possibility of any reunion of theirs. I have also talked to the brother of the wife and he also made a statement that there is no possibility of any reunion between the parties. 7. Divorce petition filed in the year 1994 by the husband is pending and that shows that the husband is no otherwise not willing since 1994 to bring the wife back to her matrimonial home. In this matter, efforts have been made for reconciliation on 11.12.1998 by this Court on which date, their Counsel made statement that they have settled all their disputes and both the parties have also decided to get themselves separated from the sacred matrimonial relationship by decree of divorce by mutual consent. Their Advocates have also given out that now the parties are firm to get their marriage dissolved by decree of divorce by mutual consent. 8. From these facts, I find that the marriage between the parties has irretrievably broken down. There is no chance whatsoever of their coming together. They have settled all their disputes and memorandum of settlement has also been filed in the Court. In pursuance of that memorandum of settlement a Demand Draft for Rs. 8. From these facts, I find that the marriage between the parties has irretrievably broken down. There is no chance whatsoever of their coming together. They have settled all their disputes and memorandum of settlement has also been filed in the Court. In pursuance of that memorandum of settlement a Demand Draft for Rs. 71,000/- has been paid to the wife and it has been accepted by her Rs. 71,000/- have been taken towards full and final claim of permanent alimony by the wife. Under this settlement, they have further agreed to withdraw all the cases which are pending in different Courts, the details of which are as under : Cr. Misc. Appln. No. 210/94-J.M.F.C. Kadi 9. Section 9 - Proceeding in District Court Mahesana H.M.P. No. 84/94 under Section 131(b) - Extra Assistant Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural), Mirzapur, Ahmedabad. 10. The parties and their Advocates have made a request to this Court that it is in the interest of justice that the parties be permitted to have their own ways in life and this Court may dissolve their marriage by a decree of divorce by mutual consent. They have mutually agreed for divorce and for this a formal application has also been filed though addressed to the Trial Court, which is taken on record of these civil revision applications. 11. It is no doubt true that ordinarily this Court should have relegated the parties to Matrimonial Court for filing of petition of consent divorce but keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case, in order to settle the dispute between the parties, and the fact that there is request made to this Court for passing of decree here in these proceedings. I consider it to be appropriate and in the larger interest of both the parties and to further avoid any inconvenience to which they may be subjected and any further expenses of litigation, this application for dissolution of their marriage by a decree of divorce by mutual consent may be considered and decided in these proceedings. The parties are living separately for last about seven years and divorce petition between the parties is pending since 1994, I do not consider it to be appropriate to wait for the notice period as provided under Section 13B of the Act, 1955. The parties are living separately for last about seven years and divorce petition between the parties is pending since 1994, I do not consider it to be appropriate to wait for the notice period as provided under Section 13B of the Act, 1955. Otherwise also, this is not mandatory and in an appropriate case same may be dispensed with by the Court. 12. As a result of aforesaid discussion, the application filed by parties for dissolution of their marriage by a decree of divorce by mutual consent is allowed and the marriage between Merukaben Natvarlal Pandya and Rakeshkumar Jayantilal Trivedi, solemnized on 8th December, 1990 at Kadi, District Mahesana, is hereby dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent. 13. As a result of this decree, the proceedings pending between the parties, details of which have been given in Paragraph-8 aforesaid have become infructuous and the same are accordingly dismissed. It is made clear that as a result of dismissal of Criminal Misc. Application No. 210 of 1994 pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Kadi, the order of the recovery of the amount of maintenance from the salary of the husband stands cancelled automatically. It is, as a clarification, further made clear that employer of the husband need not deduct this amount from his salary towards the claim of maintenance of wife. 14. The office is directed to draw a decree in this matter forthwith. 15. The marriage of the petitioner and respondent has been dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent and the matrimonial case out of which these two civil revision applications have arisen, has been dismissed. These civil revision applications have become unfructuous and accordingly the same are dismissed. No orders as to costs. 16. The R & P called by this Court of the Courts below be sent back forthwith. Application dismissed.