ORDER : M.R. SHAH, J. 1. As both these applications are inter-connected and between the same parties, both these applications are decided and disposed of by this common order. 2. Civil Application No. 7101 of 2016 in First Appeal No. 1544 of 2016has been preferred by the applicant herein-original appellant of Family Suit No. 317 of 2008 for appropriate interim relief/order to stay the further execution, implementation and operation of the impugned order passed by the learned Family Court, Rajkot passed in Family Suit No. 317 of 2008, during the pendency and final disposal of main First Appeal. Civil Application No. 8129 of 2016 has been preferred by the applicant herein- original opponent wife for interim alimony under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, during the pendency and final disposal of the main First Appeal. 3. The facts leading to the present Civil Application in nutshell are as under: 3.1 That the applicant herein-original applicant-husband preferred aforesaid Hindu Marriage Petition/Family Suit for getting decree of divorce under the provision of Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. That in the said suit, the original opponent wife filed the counter claim claiming permanent alimony and the accommodation for herself and her son. That vide judgment and decree dated 13.04.2016, the learned Family Court has dismissed the aforesaid suit and has refused to decree of divorce. However, while dismissing the suit, the learned Judge has partly allowed the counter claim of the wife and has directed original plaintiff as under: “3. The plaintiff is ordered to purchase a 1 BHK (One Bedroom, Hall, Kitchen) flat in the name of defendant, within the raius of 5 KM from the flat, where defendant is residing, by executing registered sale deed in the name of defendant. 4. The plaintiff is hereby ordered to pay Rs. 13,00,000/- (Thirteen lacs) towards the permanent alimony of defendant, out of which defendant shall keep in FD of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Five Lacs) in the name of her minor son towards his higher education. 5. 4. The plaintiff is hereby ordered to pay Rs. 13,00,000/- (Thirteen lacs) towards the permanent alimony of defendant, out of which defendant shall keep in FD of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Five Lacs) in the name of her minor son towards his higher education. 5. As the defendant has been awarded permanent alimony u/s 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, plaintiff shall be at liberty to go for cancellation of order of maintenance passed U/s 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure-1973 in accordance with law.” 3.2 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and decree passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Rajkot passed in Family Suit No. 317 of 2008, the original plaintiff-applicant-husband has preferred First Appeal and that the said First Appeal is admitted by the Division Bench of this Court and is pending for final disposal. 3.3 That the Civil Application No. 7101 of 2016 has been preferred by the original plaintiff - husband to stay further implementation, operation and execution of impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Family Court. 3.4 That the original opponent wife has preferred Civil Application No. 8129 of 2016 for interim alimony, during the pendency and final disposal of the main First Appeal. 4. Shri Pratik Jasani, learned advocate for the original applicant husband has vehemently submitted that directions issued by the learned Family Court while passing the impugned judgment and decree i.e. awarding the permanent alimony is absolutely illegal and contrary to provision of Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act. It is submitted that the order of permanent alimony passed by the learned trial Court is wholly without jurisdiction. 4.1 It is vehemently submitted by Shri Jasani, learned advocate for the original applicant-husband-original plaintiff that considering Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act in case and at the time when Court passes the decree of divorce then and then only the order of permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act can be passed. 4.2 It is submitted that in the present case the suit preferred by the original applicant/plaintiff for decree of divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act has been dismissed by the learned Family Court and the learned Family Court has refused to pass the decree of divorce. 4.2 It is submitted that in the present case the suit preferred by the original applicant/plaintiff for decree of divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act has been dismissed by the learned Family Court and the learned Family Court has refused to pass the decree of divorce. It is submitted that on one hand when the decree of divorce is refused, in that case, there is no question of passing any order of permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Therefore, it is requested to stay further execution, operation and implementation of the impugned order passed by the learned Family Court by which while partly allowing the counter claim, the learned Judge has passed an order of permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act in favour of original opponent-wife. 5. Shri Premal S. Rachh, learned advocate for the original opponent-wife, considering Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act has requested to pass appropriate order in Civil Application No. 7101 of 2016 preferred by the original applicant-husband. 5.1 Now, so far as Civil Application No. 8129 of 2016 preferred by the wife claiming interim alimony under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, during the pendency and final disposal of the main First Appeal is concerned, Shri Rachh, learned advocate for the original opponent - wife has vehemently submitted that at present the applicant wife is getting Rs. 9000/- per month only towards maintenance pursuant to the order passed under Section 125/127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is vehemently submitted by Shri Rachh, learned advocate for the applicant-wife that it is very difficult for the applicant-wife to maintain herself and her son born out of their wedlock out of Rs. 9000/- per month. 5.2 It is vehemently submitted by Shri Rachh, learned advocate for the original applicant-wife that even the aforesaid amount of Rs. 9000/- per month is also not being paid by the husband regularly. 5.3 It is submitted by Shri Rachh, learned advocate for the original applicant-wife that opponent husband has recently retired as Class I Government Officer and has get at least Rs. 25 to Rs. 30 lakhs towards retirement benefits and is getting minimum pension of Rs. 30,000/- per month. 9000/- per month is also not being paid by the husband regularly. 5.3 It is submitted by Shri Rachh, learned advocate for the original applicant-wife that opponent husband has recently retired as Class I Government Officer and has get at least Rs. 25 to Rs. 30 lakhs towards retirement benefits and is getting minimum pension of Rs. 30,000/- per month. 5.4 It is submitted that the opponent-husband is staying with his two major sons both are earning and therefore, opponent husband has no further liability of the sons who are now major. 5.5 It is submitted that as such the opponent-husband is not disclosing the correct facts with respect to his retirement benefits and even the amount of pension received by him. 5.6 It is submitted that in these hard days, it is very difficult for the applicant-wife to maintain herself and her son and also for the education of her son. It is submitted that considering the social status of the parties, inflation, standard of leaving, it is requested to grant interim alimony at least at the rate of Rs. 20,000/- per month for her maintenance as well as for maintenance of her son. 6. An affidavit in reply is filed by the opponent-husband. In the reply, it is denied that he has retired as Class I Government Officer. According to the husband, he has retired as Class II Government Officer. 6.1 It is further stated by the opponent husband in his affidavit in reply that he has retired on 31.08.2015 and is drawing total pension of Rs. 25,988/- per month. It is stated that the department is deducting amount of Rs. 5554/- towards commuted value pension. It is submitted that therefore, if the amount of CVP is added to his pension, it comes to Rs. 21,542/-. 6.2 It is further stated in the affidavit in reply that at the time of retirement he has received Rs. 8,36,469/- towards retirement benefits. He has received a sum of Rs. 10 lakhs towards gratuity and as total retirement benefits has received Rs. 23,94,379/-. It is stated by opponent husband that he is residing in rental premise at Jamnagar and his paying Rs. 5000/- towards rent. He is taking service of the cook and making payment of Rs. 3000/- per month. It is further stated that opponent husband is having responsibility of two sons viz. 23,94,379/-. It is stated by opponent husband that he is residing in rental premise at Jamnagar and his paying Rs. 5000/- towards rent. He is taking service of the cook and making payment of Rs. 3000/- per month. It is further stated that opponent husband is having responsibility of two sons viz. Jugnak and Bhavin who are unemployed and are in search of job. Shri Jasani, learned advocate for the opponent-husband has submitted that the opponent husband is paying Rs. 9000/- per month towards maintenance to the applicant wife. Therefore, it is requested not to pass any further order with respect to interim alimony, looking to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case. 7. Heard the learned advocates for the respective parties at length. So far as Civil Application No. 7101 of 2016 preferred by the original applicant-husband which has been submitted for appropriate interim order to stay further implementation, execution and operation of the impugned order passed by the learned Family Court by which, the learned Family Court while partly allowing counter claim and the opponent wife has awarded permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act and has directed the original plaintiff husband to purchase flat in the name of defendant, within the radius of 5 K.M from the flat, where defendant is residing, by executing registered sale deed in the name of defendant is concerned, considering Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, learned advocate for the original plaintiff-husband is justified in making the grievance that on one hand when the learned Family Court has dismissed the suit preferred by the husband and has refused to pass decree of divorce and on the other hand learned Family Court has passed order of permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, which is not permissible. Considering Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act only in a case where the Court passes decree of divorce, in that case, only the order of permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act can be passed. That while in the present case on one hand the learned Family Court has dismissed the suit and has refused to pass the decree of divorce and on the other hand has allowed the counter claim and has passed order of permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act. That while in the present case on one hand the learned Family Court has dismissed the suit and has refused to pass the decree of divorce and on the other hand has allowed the counter claim and has passed order of permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Under the circumstances, it prima facie appears that learned Family Court is not justified in granting permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, while passing the impugned order. 8. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, Civil Application No. 7101 of 2016 stands allowed. By way of interim order, further execution, operation and implementation of the impugned order passed by the learned Family Court passed in Family Suit No. 317 of 2008 allowing the counter claim and granting permanent alimony as per the operative portion of the impugned judgment is directed to be stayed till final disposal of the main First Appeal. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent so far as Civil Application No. 7101 of 2016 is concerned. No costs. Civil Application No. 8129 of 2016 9. Now, so far as Civil Application No. 8129 of 2016 preferred by the applicant wife claiming interim alimony under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, during the pendency and final disposal of the main First Appeal is concerned, it is required to be noted that applicant wife is getting Rs. 9000/- per month only towards maintenance pursuant to the order passed under Section 125/127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Out of the aforesaid amount, she is required to maintain herself as well as her son born out of the wedlock. She is also required to make provision for the education of her son. 9.1 It cannot be disputed that even wife is entitled to maintenance as per the status of the husband. The opponent husband has recently retired as a Class I Government Officer who was serving in the Commercial Department, Government of Gujarat. There is a dispute whether he has retired as Class II or Class I Government Officer. Be that as it may, assuming that he has retired as Class II Government Officer, at present he is getting approximately Rs. 31,000/- towards pension. He has received Rs. 25 to 30 lakhs towards retirement benefits. There is a dispute whether he has retired as Class II or Class I Government Officer. Be that as it may, assuming that he has retired as Class II Government Officer, at present he is getting approximately Rs. 31,000/- towards pension. He has received Rs. 25 to 30 lakhs towards retirement benefits. He will also be getting revised pension as per the recommendation of the 7th Pay Commission and his pension is likely to be increased substantially. Be that as it may, at present he is getting approximately Rs. 31,000/- towards pension. 9.2 It is the case on behalf of the husband that he is required to take care of his other two sons and one another son Tejan though is residing separately recently he has incurred loss in the business. It is required to be noted that all the sons of the husband are major and according to applicant wife they are well placed and serving in the private sector. On the other hand, the applicant wife being a lady is required to maintain herself as well as her son and also for his education. She is getting Rs. 9000/- per month only towards maintenance pursuant to the order passed under Section 125/127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that if applicant wife is awarded interim alimony at the rate of Rs. 15000/- per month at this stage (including amount of Rs. 9000/- which she is getting under Section 125/127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure) which can help the applicant wife to maintain herself and her son. 10. Under the circumstances, Civil Application No. 8129 of 2016 is hereby partly allowed. The respondent husband is hereby directed to pay Rs. 15000/- per month to the applicant wife towards interim alimony under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act during the pendency and final disposal of the main First Appeal. Any amount paid for the maintenance pursuant to the order passed under Section 125/127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure shall be adjusted. The applicant wife shall be paid interim alimony as per the present order from June 2016. Any amount paid for the maintenance pursuant to the order passed under Section 125/127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure shall be adjusted. The applicant wife shall be paid interim alimony as per the present order from June 2016. Arrears to be paid within a period of four weeks from today and the respondent husband is directed to pay interim alimony as per the present order to the applicant wife every month regularly and between 1st to 7th day of every English Calendar month regularly without fail and continue to pay the same till final disposal of the main First Appeal and/or any further order passed in the First Appeal. It is made clear that present interim alimony order at this stage and considering the amount of pension received by the husband and in case in future the amount of pension is increased, it will be open for the applicant wife for modification of the present order and/or request to enhance the interim alimony and as and when such application is made, the same be considered in accordance with law and on merits. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent so far as Civil Application No. 8129 of 2016 is concerned. No costs.