ORDER 1. Parties have jointly filed an application (I.A.No.5425/2018) under section 13(B) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. 2. They have decided that they have been litigating in the Family Court since 2011 when present appellant had filed an application on 1.7.2011 seeking divorce under section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act and on the hand respondent had filed a case on 14.2.2012 seeking restitution of conjugal rights under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Vide judgment dated 15.7.2016 application under section 13(1)(ia) seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty was dismissed, whereas application filed by the respondent under section 9 was allowed and present appellant was directed to live with her husband for restitution of conjugal rights and respondent in this appeal was directed to maintain dignity and honour of his wife and further fulfill requirements of his wife and daughter. 3. Now by filing such a mutual application for divorce under section 13(B) a decree of divorce has been sought on the ground that they are staying separately for last eight years and there has been no relationship of husband and wife, and therefore, in the light of the law laid down in the case of Amardeep Singh v. Harveen Kaur as reported in 2017 (III) MPWN 69 (SC)= (2017) 8 SCC 746 , period of six months of separation be condoned and a decree of divorce with mutual consent be passed. It is mentioned in para 6 of the application itself that parties have decided to mutually dissolve their marriage and appellant shall not claim anything from the respondent in the form of Stridhan or any other expenses incurred in the marriage or on account of maintenance and she will also not claim any amount under section 125 of CrPC or under sections 24 and 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act. It has also been agreed that respondent shall continue to pay a sum of Rs. 3,000/- per month to his daughter Yamini for her maintenance till she is eligible for such amount as per law. It has also been agreed that respondent shall continue to pay a sum of Rs. 3,000/- per month to his daughter Yamini for her maintenance till she is eligible for such amount as per law. Though it is mentioned in para 7 of the application that after daughter of the appellant and the respondent attains majority, she shall not claim any maintenance from respondent Manoj Shukla and similarly it is mentioned in para 9 that appellant and her daughter shall not claim any share in the property of the respondent, but learned counsel for the parties agree that dissolution of marriage is between husband and wife and with mutual consent they can give up their rights and interests in the property of other party, but as far as minor daughter is concerned, her legal rights cannot be terminated with the consent of parents and such legal rights would survive and it will be as per discretion of the daughter when she attains majority whether to exercise such rights or not. There is no estoppel in law, and therefore, legal rights of a minor child cannot be abrogated by an agreement between the parents. Thus both the counsel and their respective parties accept that as far as claims of their daughter Yamini are concerned, they be not made part of this mutual divorce decree and they shall be governed by the law on the subject. 4. In view of the aforesaid, application (I.A.No. 5425/2018) under section 13 (B) of the Hindu Marriage Act is accepted. It is declared that marriage, which was performed between appellant Smt. Rakhi Shukla and respondent Manoj Shukla on 21.2.2002 at Gwalior, stands dissolved and both the parties shall not claim any right or share in the property of other. A decree be drawn in the above terms. 5. Accordingly, this appeal is disposed of.