Judgment · High Court

Heard Mr. KK Dey, learned counsel appearing for the appellant. Also heard Ms. J Paul, learned counsel for the respondent.

#2. The legality and validity of the concluding paragraph of the judgment an d decree dated 25.09.2007 passed in F.C. (Civil) No.214 of 2004 is under challen ge in this appeal, whereby and whereunder the Principal Judge, Family Court, Guw ahati while dissolving the marriage between the parties by a decree of divorce, the court directed the respondent husband to pay a sum of Rs.1500/- per month as maintenance allowance to the appellant wife from the date of the order.

#3. The factual matrix leading to filing of the instant appeal in a nutshell is as follows: The appellant wife herein sought for a decree of divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short ’Act 1955’) against the respondent husband before the family Court, Guwahati on the ground of cruelty. It has been admitted that their marriage solemnized on 09.02.2001 according to Hindu rites and custo m but due to the cruelty meted out to the wife, she was compelled to leave the m atrimonial home on 27.03.2004. The pleadings were exchanged between the parties and on the basis of established facts the court framed the following issues: - Whether the respondent has treated the petitioner with cruelty? a) Whether the petitioner is entitled to a decree of divorce? b) To what relief/reliefs the parties are entitled? c)

#4. During the trial, both the parties were examined to substantiate their r espective case based on the pleadings. The learned trial judge answered the firs t two issues in favour of the wife wherefor dissolved the marriage between the s pouse by a decree of divorce. While dissolving the marriage between the spouse b y a decree of divorce, the learned trial judge granted maintenance directing the respondent husband to pay a sum of Rs.1500/- per month to the appellant wife fr om the date of the order and the question of maintenance as granted is the subje ct matter of the instant appeal.

#5. There is no dispute that under the Act, 1955 more particularly, under Se ction 25 of the Act, the obligation of the husband to provide for his wife’s mai ntenance and support does not come to an end simply on the passing of a decree f or any of reliefs which the court is empowered to grant under the Act even when the decree is passed in favour of the wife. The court is empowered to direct th at the amount to be paid by one spouse to another either in the form of gross su m or monthly or periodical sum having regard to the respondent’s own income or o ther property, which the learned trial Court failed to consider though an amount of Rs.1500/- per month is directed to be paid to the wife as maintenance allowa nce. Learned counsel for the appellant wife submits that getting of lump sum 6. amount would be more beneficial as compared to maintenance allowance of Rs.1500/ - per month granted to the appellant by the trial Court. It has been further poi nted out that payment of Rs.1500/- per month will not be adequate to take of nee ds of the wife, having regard to the cost of living. Moreover, the trial Court f ixed the amount of maintenance treating income of the husband only to be Rs.4,00 0/- whereas, his salary is much more. Learned counsel for the husband has not be en able to rebut the stand of the wife. Having regard to financial and social st atus of the husband and need of the wife for survival, considering the provision s of Section 25 of the Act, 1955 as well as keeping in view the entirety of the situation, the Court deems it fit to grant permanent alimony as prayed for. We, therefore, find it reasonable to ask the respondent husband to pay Rs.2.5 lakhs (Rupees two lakhs fifty thousand) only as permanent alimony to be payable within a period of 4 (four) months from today. Further making it clear that till such amount is paid to the appellant wife within the time as indicated above, the res pondent husband shall pay maintenance at the rate of Rs.1500/- per month as dire cted by the learned trial judge. This arrangement shall continue till the respon dent pays Rs.2.5 lakhs (Rupees two lakhs fifty thousand) only by way of a bank d raft in the name of the appellant whereafter he shall be absolved of the liabili ty to pay monthly maintenance of Rs.1500/- (Rupees one thousand five hundred) on ly. 7. udge, Family Court, Guwahati passed in F.C. (Civil) No.214/04. With the above direction, we modify the order of the learned Principal J

#8. . No order as to costs. The appeal is accordingly disposed of in terms of the above modification