. Divorced person when may marry again
. Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act inter alia provides that all decrees and orders made by the Court in any proceedings under the Act may be appealed from under any law for the time being in force, as if they were decrees and orders of the Court made in the exercise of its original civil jurisdiction. Section 15 provides that "when a marriage has been dissolved by a decree of divorce and there is no right of appeal against the decree, or, if there is such a right of appeal, the time for appealing has expired without an appeal having been presented but has been dismissed, it shall be lawful for either party to the marriage to marry again".
Under sub section 4 of Section 28 of the Hindu marriage Act, the time for filing an appeal against a decree of divorce is 90 days. Thus, the respondent/husband ought to have waited for a minimum 90 days from the date of decree to remarry.
Above mention these two sections make it clear that where a marriage has been dissolved, either party to the marriage can lawfully marry only when there is no right of appeal against the decree dissolving the marriage or, if there is such a right of appeal, the time for filing appeal has expired without an appeal having been presented, or if an appeal has been presented it has been dismissed. It is true that S. 15 does not in terms apply to a case of an application for special leave to this Court. Even so, we are of opinion that the party who has won in the High Court and got a decree of dissolution of marriage cannot be marrying immediately after the High Court's decree and thus take away from the losing party the chance of presenting an application for special leave. Event hough S. 15 may not apply in terms and it may not have been lawful for the first respondent to have married immediately after the High Court's decree, for no appeal as of right lies from the decree of the High Court to his Court in this matter, we still think that it was for the first respondent to make sure whether an application for special leave had been filed in this Court