JUDGMENT : Sandeep Sharma, J. By way of instant appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, challenge has been laid to judgment dated 4.6.2016, rendered by the learned District Judge, Kullu, District Kullu, HP in HMP No. 74 of 2013 Registration No. 558 of 2013, whereby petition having been filed by the appellant under Section 13 (1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce, has been dismissed. 14.8.2012, as per local customs of the area at Hadimba Temple, Manali. It is also not in dispute that no issue was born out of their wedlock. Both the parties lived together as husband and wife for some time and during this period, they stayed with maternal grand-mother of respondent at Manali. But, subsequently, appellant filed a petition for divorce against the respondent, alleging therein that after 2-3 months of the marriage, he came to know that respondent was addicted to alcohol and drugs. Appellant further claimed that he repeatedly persuaded respondent not to indulge in such habits, but she did not adhere to it, rather, he was given beatings under the influence of liquor. It also emerges from the record that matter also came to be reported to the State Women Commission, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla, on whose directions, matter was referred to the Superintendent of Police, Kullu, who further directed the SHO, Police Station, Kullu, to conduct inquiry. Though, the parties settled the matter before SHO, Police Station Kullu, but it appears that parties were not able to live together for quite long. Aforesaid allegations as made by appellant were denied by the respondent in her written statement/ reply filed before the Court below. Learned District Judge, Kullu, vide judgment dated 4.6.2016, dismissed the petition for divorce, preferred by the appellant. In the aforesaid background, appellant, approached this Court by way of instant proceedings, praying therein for dissolution of marriage by decree of divorce after setting aside judgment dated 4.6.2016, passed by learned District Judge, Kullu, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh in HMP No. 74 of 2013. 3. In the aforesaid background, appellant, approached this Court by way of instant proceedings, praying therein for dissolution of marriage by decree of divorce after setting aside judgment dated 4.6.2016, passed by learned District Judge, Kullu, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh in HMP No. 74 of 2013. 3. Today, during the proceedings of the case, learned counsel representing the parties, on the instructions of their respective clients, who are present in the Court, submitted that the parties have amicably settled the matter inter se them vide compromise dated 11.9.2017, annexure A-1 of the application under Section 151 CPC, filed during the course of day itself. In the aforesaid application, it is prayed by the parties that in view of compromise dated 11.9.2017, present appeal, under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, may be converted into petition under Section 13B of the Act ibid and decree of divorce by way of mutual consent be passed in the interest of justice. 4. At this stage, it may be noticed that both the parties have moved application under Section 151 CPC, jointly, through their counsel stating therein that they have settled the matter amicably inter se them and they want to dissolve their marriage by way of mutual consent. Application is taken on record, Registry to register the same. This Court, solely with a view to ascertain genuineness and correctness of averments contained in the application as well as compromise arrived inter se parties, recorded the statements of both the parties on oath, who are present in the Court. Nitika (respondent herein) stated on oath before the Court that, she alongwith her husband (appellant) has resolved by way of compromise, Annexure A-1, to get the marriage dissolved by way of mutual consent. She further stated before the Court, that she has compromised the matter of her own free will and without there being any external pressure and she has no objection in case decree of divorce by way of mutual who is present in the Court, alongwith her maternal uncle Sh. Hem Raj Sharma, who is also a witness to the compromise, acknowledged the factum with regard to receipt of Rs.2.00 Lakh as one time settlement from the appellant. Hem Raj Sharma, who is also a witness to the compromise, acknowledged the factum with regard to receipt of Rs.2.00 Lakh as one time settlement from the appellant. She further stated before this Court that vide aforesaid compromise, she has agreed to withdraw the cases registered against the appellant, under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, as well as proceedings under Section 125 CrPC. Appellant, namely Shashank, also stated on oath that they have resolved to get their marriage dissolved by way of mutual consent and in terms of compromise, he has paid Rs.2.00 Lakh to the respondent, in the presence of Sh. Hem Raj, i.e. maternal uncle of the respondent. Statements of the parties are taken on record. 5. After having carefully perused averments contained in the application, jointly moved by the parties, as well as compromise placed on record, this Court sees no impediment in accepting the request/prayer made on behalf of both the parties for dissolution of marriage by way of mutual consent. Since, both the parties have jointly prayed before this Court, that the present appeal be converted into petition under Section 13B of the Act ibid, as they have mutually agreed to dissolve the marriage, present appeal is ordered to be converted into petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act. Since, instant appeal is pending before this Court, from 14.6.2016 i.e. approximately for the last fifteen months, statutory period of six months as envisaged under Section 13B of the Act, for granting decree by mutual consent can be waived, especially when there is no possibility of rapprochement between the parties and marriage has broken beyond repair. In this regard, it would be apt to take note of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Veena vs. State (Government of NCT of Delhi) and another, (2011) 14 SCC 614 , wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has held as under: “We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and talked to the parties. The appellant has filed a divorce petition under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, being HMA No.397/2008 which is pending before the Court of Sanjeev Mattu, Additional District Judge, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, we deem it appropriate to transfer the said divorce petition to this Court and take the same on Board. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, we deem it appropriate to transfer the said divorce petition to this Court and take the same on Board. The said divorce petition is converted into one under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act and we grant divorce to the parties by mutual consent.” 6. However, in the present case, the parties are in appeal before this Court, as such, prayer of the parties to convert the appeal into petition under Section 13B of the Act is required to be considered accordingly. 7. Otherwise also, it is quite evident from the record that the parties are not living together since 2013 i.e. for the last four years. Moreover, this Court, after having interacted with the parties, sees no possibility of reconciliation inter se parties, as such, no fruitful purpose would be served in case, the matter is kept pending for another six months before passing decree of divorce by mutual consent. 8. Hon'ble Apex Court in Priyanka Khanna v. Amit Khanna, (2011) 15 SCC 612 , has further held as under: “7. We also see from the trend of the litigations pending between the parties that the relationship between the couple has broken down in a very nasty manner and there is absolutely no possibility of a rapprochement between them even if the matter was to be adjourned for a period of six months as stipulated under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act. 8. We also see from the record that the first litigation had been fled by the respondent husband on 2-6-2006 and a petition for divorce had also been filed by him in the year 2007. We therefore, feel that it would be in the interest of justice that the period of six months should be waived in view of the above facts.” 9. In this case also, statutory period of six months deserves to be waived keeping in view the fact that the marriage between the parties has broken beyond repair and there seems to be no possibility of parties living together. 10. Consequently, in view of detailed discussion made herein above, the present appeal is converted into petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act and marriage of both the parties is ordered to be dissolved by way of mutual consent. 10. Consequently, in view of detailed discussion made herein above, the present appeal is converted into petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act and marriage of both the parties is ordered to be dissolved by way of mutual consent. Registry is directed to draw a decree of dissolution of marriage by mutual consent accordingly. Needless to say, both the parties shall abide by terms and conditions contained in the compromise and all the cases pending before the Court(s) below, shall be withdrawn by the respondent, immediately, in terms of the compromise. 11. The appeal, which is now converted into petition under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, is disposed of in above terms. Pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.