CWP No.7337 of 2010.doc - 1 – HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.7337 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 10.02.2011 **** Minakshi Khurana . . . . Petitioner VS. Sahil Khurana & Anr. . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Mr. SS Majithia, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. DS Pheruman, Advocate for respondent No.1 ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner-wife seeks quashing of the order dated 16.05.2009 (Annexure P3) passed by the Lok Adalat held at Amritsar whereby a petition purported to have been filed under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (in short, ‘the Act’) has been allowed and the decree of divorce has been passed. (2). The petitioner-wife alleges that the respondent-husband has played fraud while getting the above-stated Award in his favour. (3). Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the record, I am of the considered view CWP No.7337 of 2010.doc - 2 – that no decree of divorce could have been passed by the Lok Adalat under Section 13-B of the Act without first complying with the mandatory procedure envisaged under the Statute. Even the Court of District Judge is required to follow the afore-stated procedure as ruled by a Division Bench of this Court in Charanjit Singh Mann v. Neelam Mann, AIR 2006 P&H 201. (4). The writ petition is accordingly allowed; the impugned award dated 16.05.2009 (Annexure P3) is set aside with liberty to the learned District Judge, Amritsar to dispose of the petition under Section 13-B of the Act in accordance with law. (5). Ordered accordingly. Dasti. 10.02.2011 vishal shonkar (S u r y a K a n t) Judge