JUDGMENT : Re: CAN 5476 of 2018 1. The applicant has filed the present application being CAN 5476 of 2018 for permanent alimony of Rs. 1,30,00,000/- to the petitioner/wife towards permanent alimony and Rs. 20,000/- as litigation costs in a disposed of matter. 2. Mr. Biswaroop Bhattacharya, learned advocate for the opposite party/husband vehemently opposed the prayer of the petitioner/wife. Mr. Bhattacharya submits that the opposite party/husband filed the suit for divorce and that was dismissed on contest. Assailing that dismissal order the opposite party/husband preferred appeal before this Hon'ble Court. The appeal being F.A. 187 of 2012 was decreed in favour of the opposite party/husband vide the judgment and decree dated 5th August, 2016. Against that judgment and decree the petitioner/wife preferred the special leave petition before the Hon'ble Apex Court. That special leave petition was also dismissed on 5th July, 2017. In spite of that the petitioner/wife filed an application before this Hon'ble Court for permanent alimony of Rs. 1,30,00,000/-. Therefore, in conclusion, Mr. Bhattacharya submits that in a disposed of matter the petitioner/wife cannot file any application for permanent alimony. At best the petitioner/wife can take steps in accordance with law to file appropriate application before the learned court below. 3. Considering the submissions as advanced by the learned advocates for the parties and after perusing the record, we find that though initially the opposite party/husband lost before the trial court, against that, the opposite party/husband preferred appeal before this Hon'ble Court and obtained the judgment and decree in his favour. Assailing that judgment and decree the petitioner/wife preferred the special leave petition before the Hon'ble Apex Court. That special leave petition was dismissed on 5th July, 2017. 4. Therefore, in a disposed of matter the I petitioner/wife cannot file any application for permanent alimony. The petitioner/wife only can file appropriate application before the learned court below following due process of law. Accordingly, in our considered view, the present application is not maintainable as well as not sustainable in law. 5. Resultantly, the present application being CAN 5476 of 2018 is dismissed. 6. However, the dismissal of this application will not preclude the petitioner/wife to file appropriate application before the competent civil court in accordance with law, if she is so advised. 7. 5. Resultantly, the present application being CAN 5476 of 2018 is dismissed. 6. However, the dismissal of this application will not preclude the petitioner/wife to file appropriate application before the competent civil court in accordance with law, if she is so advised. 7. If such application is filed by the petitioner/wife as indicated above, then we direct the learned court below to dispose of the same as early as possible, preferably within six months from the date of filing of such application without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties. 8. We make it clear that we have not gone into the merits of the application being CAN 5476 of 2018. The learned Judge is directed to take decision independently without being influenced by this order. 9. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished on priority basis.