JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the appellants. 2. The appellants are aggrieved against the order dated 18.6.2008 by which the Family Court, Jodhpur rejected the appellants' application filed under Section 14 of the Hindu Marriage Act for dispensing with the waiting period of one year before filing the divorce petition and consequential order of dismissal of petition filed under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act for grant of divorce by mutual consent. 3. The facts of the case are that the appellants married on 24.11.2007 as per Hindu rights. According to the appellants, after their marriage, they could not keep the relations good and they started living separate from 24.2.2008 and by the time of filing of the petition under Section 13B i.e. by 12.6.2008, they remained separate for three months. According to them, now it is not possible for them to live together and, therefore, they have decided to separate by mutual consent. It is also pleaded that the amount of permanent alimony of Rs.1,50,000/- through bank draft no.109136 dated 9.6.2008 is being deposited along with the application under Section 13B which may be given to the appellant wife after the divorce decree. With this, there will be no liability of the appellant husband towards the appellant wife except that the husband shall pay Rs.3000/- per month as maintenance amount till the decree is passed by the Family Court. 4. It is also submitted that all Stridhan has been handed over by the appellant husband to the appellant wife at Women Police Station and, therefore, on this count also, there is no dispute. Along with this application under Section 13B supported by the affidavits of both the appellants, an application under Section 14 of the Hindu Marriage Act was submitted stating the same facts with an additional fact that the wife lodged a criminal complaint on 16.5.2008 in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (JD) No.2, Jodhpur which has been sent for investigation under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. to the Mahila Police Station, Jodhpur. On this complaint, a case under Sections 498A, 406, 323 and 354 IPC was registered in the police station and in that proceedings, Stridhan was handed over to the wife. On this complaint, a case under Sections 498A, 406, 323 and 354 IPC was registered in the police station and in that proceedings, Stridhan was handed over to the wife. With these averments only, it is prayed that since the provisions made in Sections 13B and 14 are not mandatory, therefore, the appellants may be permitted to present the divorce petition as well as divorce decree may be granted without waiting for the statutory period. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted various judgments in support of his contention that the period of limitation given for Sections 13B and 14 are not mandatory. 6. Assuming without deciding this issued whether this period referred under Sections 14 and 13B are mandatory or not, we found that even if the period given in Sections 14 and 13B are not mandatory, then also, the appellants cannot succeed because of the reason that they failed to show any reason for dispensing with the waiting period either under Section 14 or under Section 13B. It appears that both the appellants believe that the provisions of law, which are not mandatory, can be ignored by the court of law and relief can be granted without there being any lawful reason. 7. The statutory provisions cannot be made useless provision of law by giving such an interpretation that the parties can ask the Court to waive the waiting period that too in mechanical manner when their exists no reason for doing so. 8. In view of the above reasons, this appeal, having no merits, is hereby dismissed.Appeal Dismissed. *******