JUDGMENT : S. PANDA, J.–MATA No.64 of 2012 has been filed by the wife challenging the Order Dated 15.5.2012 passed by the Learned Judge, Family Court, Jaipur in C. P. No.16 of 2011 for enhancement of the permanent alimony & MATA No.108 of 2012 has been filed by the husband for reducing the quantum of permanent alimony. However, decree of divorce passed by the Learned Judge, Family Court, Jaipur in C.P. No.16 of 2011 is said to have not been challenged. Since both the appeals arise out of common Judgment & decree, they were heard together & are being disposed of by this common Judgment. 2. The facts leading to the present appeals are as follows An application under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") was filed by the husband for decree of divorce. The marriage took place in the year 2009. The husband is an Engineer having B.Tech & Telecommunication qualification. Though there was no demand of dowry, Rs.3 lakhs were transferred to the account of the father-in-law of the husband for purchase of articles to be used in day-today living, The dispute started immediately on the next date of marriage due to indifferent attitude of the family members of the wife who did not take care of the Barat party. It is alleged that the wife had lack of respect towards the family members of the in-law's & did not agree to complete any rituals as per the social & cultural background of the society. She neither dried her clothes nor performed Puja. Sometimes thereafter the husband left to join his service. During his absence, the wife misbehaved & created disturbances in the in-laws house making false allegations & also threatened to file criminal cases through his uncle, who is a police officer. While the mailer stood thus, on 11.6.2009 the father of the wife had taken her to his house & avoided to receive any telephonic calls/mobile calls. Several attempts were made to settle the dispute. However, due to above attitude of the wife, there was no possibility of settlement or the dispute as the relationship between two were not congenial & she treated the family members & the husband with cruelty. Finding no other way, the husband filed the application with the aforesaid prayer which was registered as C.P No.852 of 2009 before the Family Court, Cuttack. Finding no other way, the husband filed the application with the aforesaid prayer which was registered as C.P No.852 of 2009 before the Family Court, Cuttack. After the functioning of the Family Court at Jaipur, the said case was transferred. The wife filed her written statement with counter claim traversing the allegations made by the husband. She further pleaded that the marriage was an arranged marriage & there was a demand of motor cycle, LCD colour television, fridge, furniture, gold & silver ornaments, household articles from the side of the Petitioner which was beyond the capacity of the father of the wife. The father of the wife had also given Rs.3 lakhs to the father of the husband to purchase furniture & other house hold articles. She was harassed & misbehaved for non-fulfilment of the dowry. Her father tried his best to fulfil the dowry demand. However, the in-laws tortured her & did not allow her to meet her parents. Thereafter, they approached the police & as such she returned to her parents house with mental shock & trauma & hopeful for amicable settlement. She was subjected to severe mental & physical torture for which she filed an application under the Domestic Violence Act. Accordingly, the husband was responsible for irreparable damage in the marital relationship. Since the husband made an allegation about the character of the wife, she had to stay in her parents' house & file a counter claim demanding the return of the Stridhan property which had been given at the time of marriage & to pay permanent alimony. 3. In support of their respective pleas, the husband examined himself as P.W.1 & examined another witness. The wife examined herself as O.P.W.5 & also examined four other witnesses. Xerox copy of pay particulars of the husband & some other documents were produced which were marked as Exts.A to C. Taking into consideration the materials available on record, the Court below recorded the finding that it had become difficult on the part of the wife to stay in her marital home till the end of her life. Therefore, she is entitled for a decree of divorce & the Court below directed the husband to pay a lump sum of Rs.10 lakhs, inclusive of Rs.3 lakhs, as permanent alimony. 4. Therefore, she is entitled for a decree of divorce & the Court below directed the husband to pay a lump sum of Rs.10 lakhs, inclusive of Rs.3 lakhs, as permanent alimony. 4. Learned Counsel for the Appellant-wife submitted that the said amount is at a lower side taking into consideration the status of the parties & the salary received by the husband. The husband is deducting the amount from his salary & he will get the benefit of such deduction in future. However, ignoring those facts, the Family Court has fixed the permanent alimony at a lower side. Therefore, the quantum of maintenance is to be enhanced. 5. Learned Counsel for the Respondent-husband, however, submitted that the wife created an unhealthy atmosphere in the in-laws house & she did not perform her duties towards in-laws as per the social custom which amounts to mental cruelty towards the in-laws. Therefore, the wife is not entitled to get any compensation & she has filed many criminal cases against the husband & his family members falsely. Since the quantum of permanent alimony is at a higher side, the same may be reduced. 6. This Court has taken into consideration all the above & the fact that both the parties have agreed for dissolution of marriage by decree of divorce. Admittedly, the husband is an Engineer working in a Company in Pune & from the salary slip, it appears that the salary of the husband is more than Rs. 1,00,000 per month. 7. The Apex Court in the case of K. Srinivas Rao v. D.A. Deepa reported in (2013) 5 SCC 226 while parting with the case discussed the issues which need to be dealt with in the interest of the victim of the matrimonial dispute & observed that while purely a civil matrimonial dispute can be amicably settled by a Family Court either by itself or by directing the parties to explore the possibility of settlement through mediation, a complaint under Section 498-A IPC presents difficulty because the said offence is not compoundable. The Court has always adopted a positive approach & encouraged settlement of matrimonial disputes & discouraged their escalation. The Court has always adopted a positive approach & encouraged settlement of matrimonial disputes & discouraged their escalation. Taking into consideration the decisions of G.V. Rao v. L.H.V Prasad, (2000) 3 SCC 693 , B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675 & (2012) 10 SCC 303 , Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, the Apex Court held that certain offences which overwhelmingly & predominantly bear civil flavour like those arising out of matrimony, particularly relating to dowry, etc. or the family dispute & directed that though offence punishable under Section 498-A IPC is not compoundable, in appropriate cases if the parties are willing & if it appears to the criminal Court that there exist elements of settlement, it should direct the parties to explore the possibility of settlement through mediation & where the offender & the victim had settled all disputes between them amicably, irrespective of the fact that such offences have not been made compoundable, the High Court may quash the criminal proceedings if it feels that by not quashing the same, the ends of justice shall be defeated. 8. Law is well settled that the quantum of alimony should be fixed taking into consideration the status of the parties. In view of the above we feel that the quantum of permanent alimony is at a lower side. 9. In view of the above position of law & taking into consideration the facts & circumstances of the case & the price index, it will be just & proper to enhance the permanent alimony from Rs.10,00,000 to Rs.12.50,000 (rupees twelve lakhs fifty thousand). 10. Accordingly, we enhance the permanent alimony from Rs. 10,00,000 to Rs.12.50,000 (rupees twelve lakhs fifty thousand). The said amount shall be paid to the wife within two months from today. As the decree of divorce has been passed, all the criminal cases which are pending shall be dropped on filing of an application by both the parties on payment of the permanent alimony. With the above direction, the appeals along with Misc. Case Nos. 108 of 2012 & 50 of 2013 arising out of MATA No.64 of 2012 stands disposed of. Mata disposed of.