Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 407 (CAL)

Sourav Halder v. Swagata Halder (Mukherjee)

2020-03-11

SHAMPA SARKAR

body2020
JUDGMENT : 1. The revisional application bearing No. C.O. 2699 of 2019 has been filed by the wife challenging an order dated July 2, 2019 passed in Misc.Case No. 160 of 2018 arising out of Matrimonial Suit No.393 of 2018. 2. The learned Additional District Judge, Third Court at Barasat, North 24 Parganas, passed an order dated July 2, 2019 awarding Rs.7,000/- per month as maintenance for the minor girl child with effect from the date of application under Section 36 of the Special Marriage Act, but refused to pass any order of maintenance pendente lite in respect of the petitioner/wife. 3. Aggrieved, the petitioner has preferred this revisional application on the ground that the learned Court below by placing reliance on documents which were filed after the hearing of the application under Section 36 of the Special Marriage Act by way of firisti, passed the order impugned without granting any opportunity to the petitioner/wife to deal with the said documents or counter the documents filed by the husband. 4. It also appears from the order impugned that the learned Court below relied on those documents, namely, documents showing mutation of the wife’s name with regard to shop room, tutorial home of the wife under the name of ‘Mukherjee Tutorial’ and came to a conclusion that the wife had sufficient income to maintain herself. 5. The learned Court below took into consideration the enrolment date of the husband with the Bar Council and arrived at a further conclusion that a junior advocate could not earn Rs.1.5 lakhs per month, as alleged by the wife. It is imperative that the learned Court below should allow the parties to file objections and deal with all documents produced before the learned Court below, which may be used in the proceedings as evidence. 6. Under such circumstances, the grievance of the wife is justified. The wife should have been given an opportunity to deal with all documents produced by the husband and also to produce counter documents in support of her claim. 7. Under such circumstances, the order dated July 2, 2019 is quashed and set aside. 8. The documents filed by the husband have been handed over to the wife. The wife will file appropriate objections annexing other documents in support of her claim. 9. Parties are at liberty to adduce evidence in respect of their claim and counter claim. 10. 7. Under such circumstances, the order dated July 2, 2019 is quashed and set aside. 8. The documents filed by the husband have been handed over to the wife. The wife will file appropriate objections annexing other documents in support of her claim. 9. Parties are at liberty to adduce evidence in respect of their claim and counter claim. 10. The application under Section 36 of the Special Marriage Act will be heard afresh. The wife will file the objection along with her documents within 10 days from date. 11. The learned Court below will dispose of the application within two months thereafter. 12. This revisional application is disposed of. 13. There will be however no order as to costs. In re : C.O. 2745 of 2019 14. The revisional application bearing C.O.2745 of 2019 is an application filed by the father/ husband also being aggrieved by the order dated July 2, 2019 passed by the learned Court below in the same proceeding. 15. The petitioner is aggrieved by quantum of maintenance awarded to the child of Rs.7,000/- per month. It is contended that the learned Court below ought to have come to a specific finding with regard to the expenditure incurred for food, clothing, shelter, school fees, medical expenses and miscellaneous expenses of the child before awarding Rs.7,000/- per month as maintenance pendente lite. 16. The order dated July 2, 2019 has already been quashed and set aside. The learned Court below has been directed to hear out the application for maintenance pendente lite afresh. Thus the application shall be heard on all points including the quantum to be paid to the minor girl. Parties are at liberty to adduce evidence both oral and documentary on the expenditure of the child. 17. This revisional application is also disposed of. 18. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order be given to the parties on priority basis, if the same is applied for.