:1: IN IN IN THE PARSI CHIEF MATRIMONIAL COURT AT BOMBAY THE PARSI CHIEF MATRIMONIAL COURT AT BOMBAY THE PARSI CHIEF MATRIMONIAL COURT AT BOMBAY SUIT SUIT SUIT NO. 9 OF NO. 9 OF NO. 9 OF 2009 2009 2009 Porus Phiroze Daruwalla. ... Plaintiff No.1. V/s. Gulshan Porus Daruwalla. ... Plaintiff No.2. Mr. Z.B. Sahukar for the Plaintiffs. ..... CORAM CORAM CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. 13TH 13TH 13TH MARCH 2009. MARCH 2009. MARCH 2009. P.C. P.C. P.C. : : : . The Suit is filed for dissolution of the marriage by Mutual Consent. 2. It is stated by the Plaintiffs that ingredients of Section 32 B are satisfied inasmuch as the marriage was solemnized, as evidenced by Exhibit ‘A’ in the year 1990. After the marriage, first son was born in 1991 and the second in 1996. After birth of the second son, there were serious differences between the Plaintiffs. They have drifted away from each other to such an extent that although they reside under one roof, there has been no co-habitation. They are not residing since May 2007 as husband and wife. They tried to work out their differences but it is stated that on account of the nature and incompatibility it is not possible to work out their marriage. :2: 3. Plaintiff No.1 is gainfully employed and working outside India whereas Plaintiff No.2 is residing and permanently based in India. The parties have filed this joint Petition/Suit and both have tender their affidavit by way of evidence. They confirm the plaint averments. They confirm the statements in the affidavit and state that they are true and correct. They state that the affidavits bear their signatures. Both of them state that since May 2007, they have not resided and stayed as husband and wife. Both have stated that they have agreed to dissolve the marriage willingly and there is no force or pressure of any kind in deciding it. The marriage has been solemnized at Bombay and there is no unnecessary or improper delay in filing the Petition/Suit. To the plaint itself, the Consent Terms between parties are annexed. The Consent Terms record that the permanent custody of the minors will be with the mother and Plaintiff No.1 will have access to them. Plaintiff No.1 has agreed to bear the expenses of the children including for their welfare and education. Their medical expenses will also be paid by Plaintiff No.1. It is also agreed between parties that Plaintiff No.2 will continue to reside in the children’s room in the premises, more particularly described in the Consent Terms and the Plaint. Further, they have agreed that in the case of Plaintiff No.1 getting remarried, his wife from the said marriage will not reside in the said flat and thereafter, Plaintiff No.1 will make alternate :3: arrangement. Both parties have exchanged the personal belongings including jewellery items and have no claims against each other. Both of them have confirmed the Consent Terms (Exhibit ‘B’ to the Plaint). In these circumstances, I am satisfied that the ingredients of Section 32 B(1) are attracted. Since there is no collusion and the Petition/Suit averments and the statements made in the plaint are confirmed, there is no impediment in passing the decree, that the marriage be dissolved. 4. In the circumstances, the Suit is decreed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b). There will be no order as to costs. (S.C. (S.C. (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J.) DHARMADHIKARI,J.) DHARMADHIKARI,J.)