Research › Search › Judgment

Tripura High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 81 (TRI)

Pradip Chandra Das v. Soma Das

2022-02-16

ARINDAM LODH, T.AMARNATH GOUD

body2022
JUDGMENT T. Amarnath Goud, J. - This Appeal has been filed under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 read with Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984, against the Judgment and Decree, dated 29.05.2019 passed by the learned District Judge, North Tripura, Dharmanagar in Case No. T.S. (Divorce) 27 of 2017. 2. The facts of the case in brief as stated in the pliant are that the appellant and the respondent were legally married husband and wife. The marriage between the appellant-husband and the respondent-wife took place on 14.03.1999, according to Hindu rites, rituals, and customs in the house of the parents of the respondent, situated at Uptakhali, Panisagar, North Tripura. The appellant-husband and respondent-wife are Hindu by religion and as such, they are governed by the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. 3. The marriage of the appellant and the respondent were duly consummated and out to their wedlock one daughter was born to them on 15.03.2002. 4. The appellant is a Post Graduate Teacher and at present, he is posted at Pratyekroy H.S. School, Dharmanagar. The Appellant is drawing a monthly salary of Rs. 68,575/-. 5. The appellant-husband as petitioner filed a petition under Section 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for dissolution of the marriage of the appellant-husband and respondent-wife on the ground of desertion of the appellant-husband by the respondent-wife. The said petition for divorce filed under Section 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 has been registered as T.S. (Divorce)- 27/2017, in the file of the learned District Judge, North Tripura, Dharmanagar. 6. The respondent-wife herein entered into appearance before the learned District Judge, Dharmanagar, North Tripura, and filed a written statement denying and disputing the allegation of desertion and contending that it is the appellant-husband who has deserted the respondent-wife. The respondent-wife also filed an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. 7. Based on the pleadings, the learned Court framed the following issues for adjudication of the divorce petition. The issues are as follows:- "I. Whether the petitioner is the legally married husband of this respondent, marriage being solemnized on 14.03.1999 according to Hindu rites, customs and rituals at the parental house of the respondent? II. Whether the petitioner is entitled to get decree of divorce on the ground of desertion? III. The issues are as follows:- "I. Whether the petitioner is the legally married husband of this respondent, marriage being solemnized on 14.03.1999 according to Hindu rites, customs and rituals at the parental house of the respondent? II. Whether the petitioner is entitled to get decree of divorce on the ground of desertion? III. What other relief/reliefs as the parties are entitled to?" 8. On the issues as framed by the appellant-husband as petitioner in that T.S.(Divorce), he produced three witnesses including himself who were examined and cross-examined. The respondent-wife also adduced oral and documentary evidence. 9. After hearing both sides, the learned Court delivered judgment on 29.05.2019. The learned Court allowed the petition for divorce filed by the appellant-husband by dissolving the marriage between the appellant-husband and the respondent-wife by decree of divorce. The learned Court also directed the appellant-husband to pay monthly maintenance or Rs. 20,000/- to the respondent and their daughter. The learned counsel also directed the appellant to make a fixed deposit certificate of Rs. 30,00,000/- (Rupees thirty lakhs) in the name of the respondent-wife and their daughter. 10. Being partly aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment dated 29.05.2019, passed by the learned District Judge, North Tripura, Dharmanagar, in T.S. (Divorce) 27 of 2017 in so far the permanent alimony part of the said judgment is concerned, the appellant-husband hereby preferred the instant appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act read with Section 19(1) of the Family Court's Act, 1984 and prayed for the following reliefs:- "i. Issue notice. ii. Call for records. iii. Hear both sides and iv. After hearing allow the appeal filed under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 read with Section 19(1) of the Family Court's Act, 1984, against the judgment, dated, 29.05.2019, passed by the learned District Judge, North Tripura, Dharmanagar, In T.S. (Divorce)-27/2017 by modifying the Judgment so far the direction regarding permanent alimony is concerned. v. The Hon'ble High Court may be kind enough to set aside the direction given by the learned District Judge, North Tripura vide judgment, dated 29.05.2019 passed in T.S. (Divorce)-27/2017 as far the direction of causing fix deposit of Rs. 15 lakh each in favour of the respondent and her daughter is concerned. vi. v. The Hon'ble High Court may be kind enough to set aside the direction given by the learned District Judge, North Tripura vide judgment, dated 29.05.2019 passed in T.S. (Divorce)-27/2017 as far the direction of causing fix deposit of Rs. 15 lakh each in favour of the respondent and her daughter is concerned. vi. The Hon'ble High Court may also kind enough to modify the judgment, dated 29.05.2019, passed in T.S.(Divorce)27/2017 by reducing the amount of monthly maintenance for Rs. 20,000/- per month to Rs. 8,000/- per month payable by the respondent and her daughter. The Hon'ble High Court may also pass any further order/orders as may be deemed fit and proper." 11. Heard Ms. A. Debbarma, learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as Mr. Sankar Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the respondent. 12. Admittedly, the husband and wife are separated and the daughter is with the mother. The trial Court has fixed the monthly maintenance and permanent alimony. During the course of the argument, it is informed that the salary of the appellant-husband is enhanced from Rs. 68,575/- per month to around Rs. 78,000/- per month. 13. Be that as it may since the argument is only advanced on the point of reduction of the permanent alimony which is fixed by the Court below on the ground of being excessive and without giving proper reasons. Admittedly, the husband is employed and has sufficient means and source of income. So, it becomes his prima facie responsibility if not divorced to take care of his family, maintain medical, education, festival, travel, and other expenses throughout his lifetime and also perform the wedding of the daughter and further to attend the daughter and her family and her children all through which would be more than the amount of alimony fixed by the Court below. Hence, without interfering with the permanent alimony amount fixed in favour of the daughter, the amount of Rs. 15,00,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Lakhs) is confirmed. In so far as the permanent alimony of the wife is concerned, this Court feels that it can be reduced since the future expenditure as indicated would not be that much amount towards the expenditure as indicated in respect of the daughter. In view of the same, the amount of permanent alimony in respect of the wife is considered to be reduced. 14. In view of the same, the amount of permanent alimony in respect of the wife is considered to be reduced. 14. After hearing both the parties and perusing the evidence on record, we are of the considered opinion that the appellant-father is to deposit Rs. 15,00,000/- (Rupees fifteen lakhs) into the account of the daughter and Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lakhs) is to be deposited in the account of the respondent-wife. The arrears of Rs. 10,000/- payable toward the daughter from 2017, which maintenance the appellant-father has not paid all through and the arrears according to the respondent is Rs. 5,20,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs twenty thousand), and the same is not disputed by the appellant, thus the same stands payable by the appellant-husband. 15. When this Court initially indicated that the amount of permanent alimony is to be deposited within 2(two) months, Ms. A. Debbarma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner requested that since the petitioner is a teacher he may not be in a position to deposit the same within 2(two) months and sought for 6(six) months. This Court has considered the request and grants 6(six) months time from today for depositing the amounts. However, it is made clear that no further extension of time will be granted. In so far as the arrears of maintenance of Rs. 5,20,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs twenty thousand) payable by the appellant/father to daughter is concerned, 1 (one) month time is granted to deposit to her account. 16. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part and disposed of.