ORDER 2. The judgment dated 25.10.2016 passed by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh, Shimla, in FAO No. 420 of 2009 is called in question by Col. Pawan Kumar Sharma, husband of respondent herein. By the impugned judgment, the High Court allowed the appeal filed by the petitioner herein (i.e. Pawan Kumar Sharma) by concluding that the marital ties of the petitioner and the respondent (Smt. Bhavan Sharma) are broken down irretrievably. Consequently, the High Court has ordered that the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent be dissolved subject to petitioner paying permanent alimony to the respondent to the extent of 35% of the pensionary benefits every month. It is also ordered by the High Court that the petitioner was directed to make fixed deposits of Rs. 5,00,000/- each in favour of two daughters (born out of the wedlock) for the expenses of their marriage. The Trial Court had rejected the divorce petition filed by the petitioner herein which is set aside by the impugned judgment as mentioned supra. 3. The husband has filed SLP (C) Nos.17337-17338 of 2017 seeking setting aside the direction issued by the High Court regarding payment of permanent alimony whereas Smt. Bhavan Sharma/wife has filed Diary No. 41046 of 2018 for setting aside the judgment an order passed by the High Court dissolving the marriage. Both the appeals are heard together. 4. Having heard the learned advocates on both the sides and having perusal of records we find that the High Court is justified in concluding that the marriage between the Col. Pawan Kumar Sharma, petitioner and Smt. Bhavan Sharma, respondent herein is irretrievably broken down. Not only the adequate reasons are assigned by the High Court to set aside the judgment of the Trial Court but also to grant decree of dissolution of marriage. The records disclose that there is prolonged separation of the couple since 1996 till this day. Though number of efforts were made to continue marital relationships meaningfully by the elders and friends of the parties, no purpose was served. Even on the demise of close relatives of Mr. Pawan Kumar Sharma, which happened in the year 1999 and 2001 neither his wife nor his family members visited the place of Pawan Kumar Sharma at least to condole the demise. Even on the demise of close relatives of Mr. Pawan Kumar Sharma, which happened in the year 1999 and 2001 neither his wife nor his family members visited the place of Pawan Kumar Sharma at least to condole the demise. Even when the demise of Pawan Kumar's mother happened on 15.09.2006, his wife Smt. Bhavan Sharma or her family members did not even condole the such sad demise. 5. These apart and from other facts which we would not want to reiterate in detail once again, since, all such facts are evaluated by the High Court in a proper manner, we conclude that the judgment of the High Court regarding dissolution of the marriage needs to be upheld. 6. Ordered accordingly. 7. However, the payment of permanent alimony from out of the pension of Pawan Kumar Sharma and payment made by him towards the expenses of his daughters' marriage need to be modified to a certain extent. We have kept in mind the properties held by both the parties as well as the pension both the parties are getting after the retirement. Accordingly, the following order is made in respect of permanent alimony as well as the marriage expenses: (a) The petitioner-husband is directed to pay permanent alimony to the respondent-wife to the extent of 25% of his pensionary benefits instead of 35% as directed by the High Court in the impugned order. The same shall be given to the respondent-wife from this month onwards. (b) The petitioner-husband is directed to prepare FDRs in the name of his daughters' each in a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lacs) towards the expenses of their marriage within one month from today instead of Rs. 5,00,000/-(Rupees five lacs) as directed by the High Court and handover the same to the daughters. (c) Arrears of permanent alimony, if any, shall be paid by the petitioner-husband to the respondent-wife within a period of six months from today. 8. The impugned judgment of the High Court dated 25.10.2016 is modified to the aforesaid extent and the special leave petitions shall stand disposed of accordingly.