CRP 417/2010 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BP KATAKEY Heard Mr. Bora, learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner, who is the respondent in TS(Divorce) case No. 19/2010 presently pending in the court of the learned District Judge, Nalbari, has challenged the said proceeding on the ground that the application seeking dissolution of the ma rriage between the parties has been filed by the respondent wife even before exp iry of one year from the date of marriage. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, since under Section 14 of t he Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the court cannot entertain any petition for dissolu tion of the marriage by a decree of divorce unless on the date of filing the pet ition one year has elapsed since the date of marriage, the learned court below o ught not to have entertained the petition for dissolution of the marriage and as such the said proceeding is required to be quashed by this court. It appears from the proviso to sub Section 1 of Section 14 of the Act that the c ourt may upon application made to it allow the petition to be presented before o ne year has elapsed from the date of marriage on the ground that the case is one of exceptional hardship to the petitioner or of exceptional depravity on the pa rt of the respondent, but if it appears to the court at the hearing of the petit ion that the petitioner obtained leave to present the petition by any misreprese ntation or concealment of the nature of the case, the court may, if it pronounce s a decree, do so subject to the condition that the decree shall not have effect until after the expiry of one year from the date of the marriage or may dismiss the petition without prejudice to any petition which may be brought after the e xpiration of the said one year upon the same on substantially the same facts as those alleged in support of the petition so dismissed. The sole ground on which the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is sought to be invoked is that one year period from the date of marriage has not elapsed on the date on which the divorce petition has b een filed. The petitioner is yet to file the written statement and such plea can naturally be raised before the learned court below and in the event of raising such plea the learned court below is to decide about the maintainability of the said petition keeping in view the proviso to sub Section 1 of Section 14 of the Act. Since the said remedy is available to the petitioner, which he has not availed o f till date, I do not find any ground to interfere with the said proceeding in e xercise of the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Hence the revision petition is dismissed with the above observation. No cost.