JUDGMENT By the Court.—This appeal has been preferred by the plaintiff-appellant against the order dated 13.11.2014 passed by Family Court dismissing the petition for divorce by mutual consent filed by the parties under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”). 2. Both the parties are represented and they have been heard. 3. The appeal is reported to be beyond time of 102 days. The cause shown for delay in filing the appeal is held to be sufficient. Accordingly, delay is condoned. 4. The delay condonation application No. 97869 of 2015 is allowed. 5. Office is directed to allot a regular number to the appeal. 6. We have heard Sri Prashant Mishra, learned counsel for the plaintiff-appellant and Sri Sudhir Solanki, holding brief of Sri Virendra Singh, who appears for the defendant-respondent on merits of the appeal also. 7. Learned counsel for both the parties submits that the impugned order is unsustainable in law as it dismisses the petition for divorce by mutual consent only for the reason that on the date fixed, none of the parties had appeared and period of 18 months had elapsed since its filing. 8. The order impugned is a short order of only a paragraph and it is as follows : Þis'k gqvkA iqdkj ij ;kphx.k vuqifLFkr gSaA ÁLrqr okn vUrxZr /kkjk 13&ch fgUnw fookg vf/kfu;e fnukad 2-7-2011 dks lafLFkr fd;k x;k FkkA ;kfpdk nkf[ky djus dh frfFk ls vc rd 18 ekg ls vf/kd dh vof/k O;rhr gks tkus ds dkj.k ÁLrqr okn fujFkZd gks pqdk gS ,oa [kkfjt gksus ;ksX; gSA vr% ÁLrqr okn fujFkZd gksus ds dkju [kkfjt fd;k tkrk gSA i=koyh nkf[ky nrj gksAÞ 9. The aforesaid order states that the petition for divorce by mutual consent was filed on 2.7.2011 and 18 months have expired making the petition meaningless. 10. In view of the above statement or the finding of the Family Court that as the period of 18 months had expired from the date of presentation of the petition for divorce by mutual consent, it has become meaningless, the sole question, which requires consideration, whether such a petition becomes infructuous on the expiry of the above period. 11. Section 13-B of the Act reads as under : “13B. 11. Section 13-B of the Act reads as under : “13B. Divorce by mutual consent.—(1) Subject to the provisions of this Act a petition for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce may be presented to the district Court by both the parties to a marriage together, whether such marriage was solemnized before or after the commencement of the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1976 (68 of 1976), on the ground that they have been living separately for a period of one year or more, that they have not been able to live together and that they have mutually agreed that the marriage should be dissolved. (2) On the motion of both the parties made not earlier than six months after the date of the presentation of the petition referred to in sub-section (1) and not later than eighteen months after the said date, if the petition is not withdrawn in the meantime, the Court shall, on being satisfied, after hearing the parties and after making such inquiry as it thinks fit, that a marriage has been solemnized and that the averments in the petition are true, pass a decree of divorce declaring the marriage to be dissolved with effect from the date of the decree.” 12. A simple reading of the above provision reveals that a petition for divorce may be presented by both the parties to the marriage together if they are living separately for the period of last one year or more and agree that they are not in a position to live together and at the same time, have also agreed that the marriage be dissolved. 13. It further provides that on presentation of such a petition but not before the six months of its presentation and not later than 18 months of its filing, if it is not withdrawn, the Court after hearing the parties and making necessary inquiry, on being satisfied, that the averments in the petition are true, may pass a decree of divorce declaring the marriage to be dissolved. 14. 14. In short, a petition for divorce has to be presented by both the parties to the marriage; it cannot be taken up for consideration earlier than six months from the date of its filing; if it is not withdrawn within 18 months of its presentation, the Court can proceed to decide it on merits and if the averments made in the petition are true, pass a decree of divorce. 15. The period of 18 months referred to in the above Section 13-B(2) is in context of the withdrawal of the petition by the parties. 16. The object of providing that such a petition cannot be dealt with within 6 months of its presentation and to be decided on merits, if it is not withdrawn within a period of 18 months of its presentation is to provide cooling period to both the parties to rethink over the matter as regards to their decision to live separately and seek divorce by mutual consent. This is to avoid hasty decisions in anger, if any, taken as an outburst of incidents of ordinary wear and tear of family life. 17. Thus, the parties have been allowed the aforesaid period of 18 months to withdraw their consent on second thought and if the petition or the consent is not withdrawn, the Court is obliged to decide it on the basis of the averments made in the petition. 18. The aforesaid period of 18 months is not a period provided for deciding the petition. The aforesaid provision does not lays down that after expiry of the above period, the petition would be rendered useless or infructuous. 19. In such circumstances, the Family Court committed an error of jurisdiction in dismissing the petition on the ground that it has become meaningless as the period of 18 months from its filing has expired. 20. In the instant case, both the parties have filed a joint affidavit before the Court stating therein that they are ready and willing for divorce by mutual consent and for that purpose a further a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- has been given by the appellant-husband to the respondent-wife by means of a cheque dated 28.7.2016. 21. The counsel for the respondent-wife accepts the same. 22. 3,00,000/- has been given by the appellant-husband to the respondent-wife by means of a cheque dated 28.7.2016. 21. The counsel for the respondent-wife accepts the same. 22. Both the parties submits that they could not attend the proceedings in the Family Court on the date fixed for unprecedented reasons but they have no intention to avoid the same. 23. In these facts and circumstances, we are of the opinion that the impugned order passed by the Family Court dated 13.11.2014 is unsustainable in law. It is accordingly set aside with the direction to the Family Court to proceed and decide the petition for divorce filed under Section 13-B of the Act in accordance with law expeditiously, if possible within next three months. 24. The appeal is allowed.