ORDER : 1. The instant appeal has been filed on behalf of the appellant under Section 19(i) of the Family Court’s Act, 1984 against part of the impugned judgment and decree dated 11.07.2023 [decree signed on 18.07.2023] passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Jamtara in Original Suit No.36 of 2021, whereby and whereunder, while decreeing the said suit, the learned Family Court has directed the appellant to pay Rs. 12,00,000/- as permanent alimony and Rs. 20,000/- towards arrears of interim maintenance, i.e. total Rs. 12,20,000/- to the respondent through Demand Draft. Factual Matrix 2. The brief facts of the case are referred herein as under: The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 27.06.2019 as per Hindu rites and rituals. Following the marriage, the parties established their matrimonial residence in Mumbai where the appellant found the respondent to be an intemperate and foul mouth lady and she was physically unfit and despite his requests she did not agree to visit any doctor and concealed the reports of the doctor(s). After marriage, the respondent did not develop any love and affection with the appellant and her behavior became intolerable. The respondent used to disclose that her father ruined her life by getting her married to the appellant. She used to abuse the appellant. In October, 2020, they came back to native village where she did not like to stay with the parents of the appellant. In January, 2021, the respondent visited Ranchi and Rourkella for check-ups, but she concealed the reports. On 09.02.2021, she left her matrimonial house and despite hectic attempts, she did not return back. Therefore, Original Suit No. 36 of 2021 has been filed by the appellant-husband for decree of divorce. 3. Notice was issued to the respondent-wife who appeared and filed her written statement. Thereafter, altogether six issues have been framed by the learned Family Judge which are as follows: (i) Whether the suit maintainable in its present form? (ii) Whether there is any valid cause of action for the suit? (iii) Whether the respondent (wife) is legally married wife of the petitioner? (iv) Whether the respondent (wife) has treated the petitioner with cruelty? (v) Whether the respondent has deserted the petitioner for a continuous period of not less than two years? (vi) Whether the petitioner is entitled to the relief claimed or any other relief? 4. (iii) Whether the respondent (wife) is legally married wife of the petitioner? (iv) Whether the respondent (wife) has treated the petitioner with cruelty? (v) Whether the respondent has deserted the petitioner for a continuous period of not less than two years? (vi) Whether the petitioner is entitled to the relief claimed or any other relief? 4. The evidences have been laid on behalf of both the parties. 5. Thereafter, the judgment dated 11.07.2023 has been passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Jamtara allowing the Suit by holding that the marriage solemnized on 27.06.2019 between the parties stands dissolved from the date of the decree under the provisions of section 13(1) (ia) and (ib) of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT , 1955 and, the petitioner (appellant herein) is directed to give Rs. 12 lacs only to the respondent as permanent alimony + Rs. 20,000/- towards arrears of interim maintenance i.e. total Rs. 12,20,000/- through demand draft and there shall be no relationship of husband and wife in between the parties and the decree was signed on 18.07.2023. 6. The appellant-husband being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the part of the impugned judgment dated 11.07.2023 and decree dated 18.7.2023 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Jamtara in Original Suit No. 36 of 2021, specifically in respect of grant of alimony of Rs. 12,00,000/-has filed present First Appeal under Section 19(i) of the Family Court’s Act, 1984. Arguments advanced on behalf of the appellant: 7. It has been contended on behalf of the appellant (husband) that impugned judgment directing grant of permanent alimony in favour of the respondent is not sustainable either in the eyes of law or in the facts and circumstances involved in this case and thus liable to be set-aside. 8. It has been submitted that the while recording findings on the basis of pleadings of the parties and evidence adduced by them to the effect that the appellant was meted out with cruelty on the part of the respondent, there was no justification on the part of the learned court below to award any permanent alimony in favour of the respondent. 9. It is further stated that the impugned judgment suffers from non-consideration of the materials on record to justify the award of Rs. 12,00,000/- as permanent alimony in absence of any pleading and evidence on record. 9. It is further stated that the impugned judgment suffers from non-consideration of the materials on record to justify the award of Rs. 12,00,000/- as permanent alimony in absence of any pleading and evidence on record. There is no evidence on record justifying status of the respondent to get such permanent alimony and the same is based upon no evidence. There is no discussion showing consideration of the case on the point of permanent alimony. 10. It is further stated that in absence of any application by the respondent for grant of permanent alimony, the learned court below committed an error in granting such arbitrary amount of permanent alimony and thus the same is liable to be set-aside. 11. The learned counsel for the appellant, based upon the aforesaid grounds, has submitted that the part of judgment impugned suffers from perversity, as such, not sustainable in the eyes of law. Arguments advanced on behalf of the respondent: 12. Per contra, Mr. Ashutosh Prasad Joshi, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-wife, while defending the part of the impugned judgment, has submitted that there is no error in the impugned judgment. 13. The learned Family Judge has rightly considered the case and directed the appellant to give Rs. 12 lacs as permanent alimony + Rs. 20,000/- towards arrears of interim maintenance i.e. total Rs. 12,20,000/- to the respondent through demand draft. 14. It has been submitted that the affidavit of assets and liabilities furnished by the appellant-husband shows that the appellant is BE and was working as software engineer in a company in Mumbai and he was getting Rs. 60-70 thousand per month as salary and is also filing income tax since 2018 and, hence, the part of impugned judgment specifically in respect of grant of alimony of Rs. 12,00,000/- passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Jamtara in Original Suit No. 36 of 2021 cannot be said to be suffer from an error and, hence, it requires no interference. Analysis: 15. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the findings recorded by the learned Family Judge in the impugned judgment. 16. The case has been heard at length. Analysis: 15. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the findings recorded by the learned Family Judge in the impugned judgment. 16. The case has been heard at length. The admitted fact herein is that the suit for divorce has been filed on the ground of cruelty and desertion, i.e., by filing an application under Sections 13(1) (ia)(ib) of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT , 1955 and, accordingly, issues have been framed by the learned Family Court wherein primarily issue Nos. IV and V pertain to cruelty and desertion. 17. In support of his case the petitioner has examined altogether four witnesses, i.e., PW-1 Alok Kumar, the petitioner himself, PW-2 Kiriti Bhushan Mahato, his maternal uncle, PW-3 Sachin Deo Kumar, brother-in-law and PW-4 Malay Bhandari, a formal witness. 18. The respondent-wife has also been examined as D.W.-1. 19. The learned Family Court after appreciating the evidences which were laid by both the parties has allowed the suit filed by the plaintiff/appellant vide judgment dated 11.07.2023 holding that the marriage solemnized on 27.06.2019 between the parties stands dissolved from the date of the decree under the provisions of section 13(1) (ia) and (ib) of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT , 1955 and, the petitioner (appellant herein) is directed to give Rs. 12 lacs only to the respondent as permanent alimony + Rs. 20,000/- towards arrears of interim maintenance i.e. total Rs. 12,20,000/- through demand draft and the decree was signed on 18.07.2023. 20. The appellant-husband being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the part of the impugned judgment dated 11.07.2023 and decree dated 18.7.2023 specifically in respect of grant of alimony of Rs. 12,00,000/-has preferred the instant First Appeal. 21. Since, the appellant is aggrieved with the part of the order specifically in respect of grant of alimony of Rs. 12,00,000/- therefore, the matter has been heard on merit on the issue of permanent alimony only. 22. 12,00,000/-has preferred the instant First Appeal. 21. Since, the appellant is aggrieved with the part of the order specifically in respect of grant of alimony of Rs. 12,00,000/- therefore, the matter has been heard on merit on the issue of permanent alimony only. 22. This Court, before considering the aforesaid issue, needs to refer herein the provision of law as contained under Section 25 of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT , 1955, wherein it has been provided that any court exercising jurisdiction under this Act may, at the time of passing any decree or at any time subsequent thereto, on application made to it for the purpose by either the wife or the husband, as the case may be, order that the respondent shall pay to the applicant for her or his maintenance and support such gross sum or such monthly or periodical sum for a term not exceeding the life of the applicant as, having regard to the respondent’s own income and other property, if any, the income and other property of the applicant, it may seem to the court to be just, and any such payment may be secured, if necessary, by a charge on the immovable property of the respondent. For ready reference, Section 25 of the Act, 1955 is quoted as under: “25. For ready reference, Section 25 of the Act, 1955 is quoted as under: “25. Permanent alimony and maintenance.— (1) Any court exercising jurisdiction under this Act may, at the time of passing any decree or at any time subsequent thereto, on application made to it for the purpose by either the wife or the husband, as the case may be, order that the respondent shall pay to the applicant for her or his maintenance and support such gross sum or such monthly or periodical sum for a term not exceeding the life of the applicant as, having regard to the respondent's own income and other property, if any, the income and other property of the applicant, the conduct of the parties and other circumstances of the case, it may seem to the court to be just, and any such payment may be secured, if necessary, by a charge on the immovable property of the respondent (2) If the court is satisfied that there is, a change in the circumstances of either party at any time after it has made an order under sub-section (1), it may at the instance of either party, vary, modify or rescind any such order in such manner as the court may deem just (3) If the court is satisfied that the party in whose favour an order has been made under this section has remarried or, if such party is the wife, that she has not remained chaste, or, if such party is the husband, that he has had sexual intercourse with any woman outside wedlock, it may at the instance of the other party vary, modify or rescind any such order in such manner as the court may deem just.” 23. It is evident from the aforesaid provision that concept of permanent alimony as provided under Section 25 have been enacted with the object of removing the hardship of the wife or the husband with no independent income sufficient for living or meeting litigant expenses; such a leave can be granted as well who may also be deprived of the same on proof of having sexual intercourse outside the wedlock. It is also settled position of law that the Court may grant permanent alimony to the party while disposing of the main application even if application has been moved; meaning thereby the intent of the Act is to remove the handicap/hardship of a wife of husband by passing an appropriate order at the appropriate stage either under Section 24 or 25 of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT , 1955. The basic behind this is to sustain the live of husband or wife, if having no sufficient source of income. 24. Section 25 of Act 1955 is an enabling provision. It empowers the court in a matrimonial case to consider facts and circumstances of the spouse applying and deciding whether or not to grant permanent alimony or maintenance. Sub-section (1) of Section 25 provides that a matrimonial Court exercising the jurisdiction under the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT may at the time of passing a decree or at any time subsequent thereto on an Application made to it, order to pay maintenance. Thus, a power is conferred on the Matrimonial Court to grant permanent alimony and maintenance on the basis of a decree of divorce passed under the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT even subsequent to the date of passing of the decree on the basis of an application made in that behalf. Sub-Section (2) of Section 25 confers a power on the Court to vary, modify or rescind the order made under Sub-section (1) of Section 25 in case of change in circumstances. The power under Subsection (3) of Section 25 is an independent power. The said power can be exercised if the Court is satisfied that the wife in whose favour an order under Subsection (1) of Section 25 of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT is made has not remained chaste. In such event, at the instance of the other party, the Court may vary, modify or rescind the order under Sub-section (1) of Section 25 of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT . 25. Reference in this regard may be made to the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Kalyan Dey Chowdhury v. Rita Dey Chowdhury Nee Nandy , (2017) 14 SCC 200 . For ready reference, paragraph 14 of the judgment is quoted as under: “14. 25. Reference in this regard may be made to the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Kalyan Dey Chowdhury v. Rita Dey Chowdhury Nee Nandy , (2017) 14 SCC 200 . For ready reference, paragraph 14 of the judgment is quoted as under: “14. Section 25 of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT , 1955 confers power upon the court to grant a permanent alimony to either spouse who claims the same by making an application. Subsection (2) of Section 25 of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT confers ample power on the court to vary, modify or discharge any order for permanent alimony or permanent maintenance that may have been made in any proceeding under the Act under the provisions contained in sub-section (1) of Section 25 . In exercising the power under Section 25 (2), the court would have regard to the “change in the circumstances of the parties”. There must be some change in the circumstances of either party which may have to be taken into account when an application is made under sub- section (2) of Section 25 for variation, modification or rescission of the order as the court may deem just.” 26. We may note here that an amendment has been brought to Sub-Section (3) of Section 25 of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT by the Act No. 68 of 1976 with effect from 27th May 1996. Earlier, it was provided under Sub-section (3) of Section 25 that if the Court was satisfied that the party in whose favour an order has been made has not remained chaste, it shall rescind the order. The words “it shall rescind the order” appearing in Sub-section (3) of Section 25 were replaced by the said amendment by the words “it may at the instance of the other party vary, modify or rescind any such order....” 27. The legislature in its wisdom by the said amendment has provided that after the facts stated in Sub-section (3) of Section 25 of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT are established, the Court may vary, modify or rescind any such order under Sub-section (1) of Section 25 of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT . The legislature in its wisdom by the said amendment has provided that after the facts stated in Sub-section (3) of Section 25 of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT are established, the Court may vary, modify or rescind any such order under Sub-section (1) of Section 25 of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT . Thus, after 1976, there is a discretion conferred on the Court by Sub- section (3) of Section 25 of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT of declining to rescind, vary or modify the order under Sub-section (1) of Section 25 thereof, even if on an Application made by the husband, it is established that the wife has not remained chaste after the decree of maintenance is passed under Sub-section (1) of Section 25 . 28. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Vinny Parmvir Parmar v. Parmvir Parmar , (2011) 13 SCC 112 while appreciating the core of Section 25 of the Act 1955 has observed that for permanent alimony and maintenance of either spouse, the respondent's own income and other property, and the income and other property of the applicant are all relevant material in addition to the conduct of the parties and other circumstances of the case, for ready reference the relevant paragraph of the aforesaid judgment is being quoted as under: 12. As per Section 25 , while considering the claim for permanent alimony and maintenance of either spouse, the respondent's own income and other property, and the income and other property of the applicant are all relevant material in addition to the conduct of the parties and other circumstances of the case. It is further seen that the court considering such claim has to consider all the above relevant materials and determine the amount which is to be just for living standard. No fixed formula can be laid for fixing the amount of maintenance. It has to be in the nature of things which depend on various facts and circumstances of each case. The court has to consider the status of the parties, their respective needs, the capacity of the husband to pay, having regard to reasonable expenses for his own maintenance and others whom he is obliged to maintain under the law and statute. The court has to consider the status of the parties, their respective needs, the capacity of the husband to pay, having regard to reasonable expenses for his own maintenance and others whom he is obliged to maintain under the law and statute. The courts also have to take note of the fact that the amount of maintenance fixed for the wife should be such as she can live in reasonable comfort considering her status and mode of life she was used to live when she lived with her husband. At the same time, the amount so fixed cannot be excessive or affect the living condition of the other party. These are all the broad principles courts have to be kept (sic keep) in mind while determining maintenance or permanent alimony. 29. It needs to refer herein that no arithmetic formula can be adopted for grant of permanent alimony to wife. However, status of parties, their respective social needs, financial capacity of husband and other obligations must be taken into account. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of U. Sree v. U. Srinivas , (2013) 2 SCC 114 has observed that while granting permanent alimony, no arithmetic formula can be adopted as there cannot be mathematical exactitude. It shall depend upon the status of the parties, their respective social needs, the financial capacity of the husband and other obligations. For ready reference the relevant paragraph is being quoted as under: 33. We have reproduced the aforesaid orders to highlight that the husband had agreed to buy a flat at Hyderabad. However, when the matter was listed thereafter, there was disagreement with regard to the locality of the flat arranged by the husband and, therefore, the matter was heard on merits. We have already opined that the husband has made out a case for divorce by proving mental cruelty. As a decree is passed, the wife is entitled to permanent alimony for her sustenance. Be it stated, while granting permanent alimony, no arithmetic formula can be adopted as there cannot be mathematical exactitude. It shall depend upon the status of the parties, their respective social needs, the financial capacity of the husband and other obligations. As a decree is passed, the wife is entitled to permanent alimony for her sustenance. Be it stated, while granting permanent alimony, no arithmetic formula can be adopted as there cannot be mathematical exactitude. It shall depend upon the status of the parties, their respective social needs, the financial capacity of the husband and other obligations. In Vinny Parmvir Parmar v. Parmvir Parmar , (2011) 13 SCC 112 : (2012) 3 SCC (Civ) 290 (SCC p. 116, para 12) while dealing with the concept of permanent alimony, this Court has observed that while granting permanent alimony, the court is required to take note of the fact that the amount of maintenance fixed for the wife should be such as she can live in reasonable comfort considering her status and the mode of life she was used to when she lived with her husband. At the same time, the amount so fixed cannot be excessive or affect the living condition of the other party. 30. The issue of permanent alimony has elaborately been dealt with by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Rajnesh v. Neha & Anr. (2021) 2 SCC 324 which is the leading case law in the field, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court taking into consideration all aspects of the matter ingranting permanent alimony/maintenance, has given certain directives and also the yardstick has been given for assessing the permanent alimony. For ready reference, the relevant paragraphs of the judgment wherein law has been laid down for permanent alimony is quoted as under: “Permanent Alimony: 73. Parties may lead oral and documentary evidence with respect to income, expenditure, standard of living, etc. before the court concerned, for fixing the permanent alimony payable to the spouse. 74. In contemporary society, where several marriages do not last for a reasonable length of time, it may be inequitable to direct the contesting spouse to pay permanent alimony to the applicant for the rest of her life. The duration of the marriage would be a relevant factor to be taken into consideration for determining the permanent alimony to be paid. 75. Provision for grant of reasonable expenses for the marriage of children must be made at the time of determining permanent alimony, where the custody is with the wife. The expenses would be determined by taking into account the financial position of the husband and the customs of the family 76. 75. Provision for grant of reasonable expenses for the marriage of children must be made at the time of determining permanent alimony, where the custody is with the wife. The expenses would be determined by taking into account the financial position of the husband and the customs of the family 76. If there are any trust funds/investments created by any spouse/grandparents in favour of the children, this would also be taken into consideration while deciding the final child support. 31. Further the Hon’ble Apex Court from paragraphs 77 to 85 has laid down the criteria for determining the quantum of maintenance taking into consideration the objection of granting interim/permanent alimony to ensure that dependent spouse is not reduced to destitution or vagrancy on account of failure of marriage and not as a punishment to the other spouse by taking into various factors viz. Status ofthe parties; reasonable wants of the claimant; the independent income and property of the claimant; the number of persons, the non-applicant has to maintain etc. For ready reference, the relevant paragraphs of the judgment is quoted as under: “Criteria for determining quantum of maintenance 77. The objective of granting interim/permanent alimony is to ensure that the dependent spouse is not reduced to destitution or vagrancy on account of the failure of the marriage, and not as a punishment to the other spouse. There is no straitjacket formula for fixing the quantum of maintenance to be awarded 78. The factors which would weigh with the court inter alia are the status of the parties; reasonable needs of the wife and dependent children; whether the applicant is educated and professionally qualified; whether the applicant has any independent source of income; whether the income is sufficient to enable her to maintain the same standard of living as she was accustomed to in her matrimonial home; whether the applicant was employed prior to her marriage; whether she was working during the subsistence of the marriage; whether the wife was required to sacrifice her employment opportunities for nurturing the family, child rearing, and looking after adult members of the family; reasonable costs of litigation for a non- working wife. [Refer to Jasbir Kaur Sehgal v. District Judge, Dehradun, (1997) 7 SCC 7 ; Refer to Vinny Parmvir Parmar v. Parmvir Parmar , (2011) 13 SCC 112 : (2012) 3 SCC (Civ) 290] 79. [Refer to Jasbir Kaur Sehgal v. District Judge, Dehradun, (1997) 7 SCC 7 ; Refer to Vinny Parmvir Parmar v. Parmvir Parmar , (2011) 13 SCC 112 : (2012) 3 SCC (Civ) 290] 79. In Manish Jain v. Akanksha Jain, (2017) 15 SCC 801 : (2018) 2 SCC (Civ) 712 this Court held that the financial position of the parents of the applicant wife, would not be material while determining the quantum of maintenance. An order of interim maintenance is conditional on the circumstance that the wife or husband who makes a claim has no independent income, sufficient for her or his support. It is no answer to aclaim of maintenance that the wife is educated and could support herself. The court must take into consideration the status of the parties and the capacity of the spouse to pay for her or his support. Maintenance is dependent upon factual situations; the court should mould the claim for maintenance based on various factors brought before it. 80. On the other hand, the financial capacity of the husband, his actual income, reasonable expenses for his own maintenance, and dependent family members whom he is obliged to maintain under the law, liabilities if any, would be required to be taken into consideration, to arrive at the appropriate quantum of maintenance to be paid. The court must have due regard to the standard of living of the husband, as well as the spiralling inflation rates and high costs of living. The plea of the husband that he does not possess any source of income ipso facto does not absolve him of his moral duty to maintain his wife if he is ablebodied and has educational qualifications. [Reema Salkan v. Sumer Singh Salkan, (2019) 12 SCC 303 : (2018) 5 SCC (Civ) 596 : (2019) 4 SCC (Cri) 339] 81. A careful and just balance must be drawn between all relevant factors. The test for determination of maintenance in matrimonial disputes depends on the financial status of the respondent, and the standard of living that the applicant was accustomed to in her matrimonial home. A careful and just balance must be drawn between all relevant factors. The test for determination of maintenance in matrimonial disputes depends on the financial status of the respondent, and the standard of living that the applicant was accustomed to in her matrimonial home. [Chaturbhuj v. Sita Bai, (2008) 2 SCC 316 : (2008) 1 SCC (Civ) 547 : (2008) 1 SCC (Cri) 356] The maintenance amount awarded must be reasonable and realistic, and avoid either of the two extremes i.e. maintenance awarded to the wife should neither be so extravagant which becomes oppressive and unbearable for the respondent, nor should it be so meagre that it drives the wife to penury. The sufficiency of the quantum has to be adjudged so that the wife is able to maintain herself with reasonable comfort. 82. Section 23 of the HAMA provides statutory guidance with respect to the criteria for determining the quantum of maintenance. Sub-section (2) of Section 23 of the HAMA provides the following factors which may be taken into consideration : (i) position and status of the parties, (ii)reasonable wants of the claimant, (iii) if the petitioner/claimant is living separately, the justification for the same, (iv) value of the claimant's property and any income derived from such property, (v) income from claimant's own earning or from any other source. 83. Section 20(2) of the DV Act provides that the monetary relief granted to the aggrieved woman and/or the children must be adequate, fair, reasonable, and consistent with the standard of living to which the aggrieved woman was accustomed to in her matrimonial home. 84. The Delhi High Court in Bharat Hegde v. Saroj Hegde, 2007 SCC OnLine Del 622 : (2007) 140 DLT 16 laid down the following factors to be considered for determining maintenance : (SCC OnLine Del para 8) “1. Status of the parties. 2. Reasonable wants of the claimant. 3. The independent income and property of the claimant. 4. The number of persons, the non-applicant has to maintain. 5. The amount should aid the applicant to live in a similar lifestyle as he/she enjoyed in the matrimonial home. 6. Non-applicant's liabilities, if any. 7. Provisions for food, clothing, shelter, education, medical attendance and treatment, etc. of the applicant. 8. Payment capacity of the non-applicant. 9. 4. The number of persons, the non-applicant has to maintain. 5. The amount should aid the applicant to live in a similar lifestyle as he/she enjoyed in the matrimonial home. 6. Non-applicant's liabilities, if any. 7. Provisions for food, clothing, shelter, education, medical attendance and treatment, etc. of the applicant. 8. Payment capacity of the non-applicant. 9. Some guesswork is not ruled out while estimating the income of the non-applicant when all the sources or correct sources are not disclosed. 10. The non-applicant to defray the cost of litigation. 11. The amount awarded under Section 125 CrPC is adjustable against the amount awarded under Section 24 of the Act.” 85. Apart from the aforesaid factors enumerated hereinabove, certain additional factors would also be relevant for determining the quantum of maintenance payable.” 32. This Court, in the touchstone of aforesaid judgment, is now coming to factual aspect involved in the present case so as to come to the conclusion that the quantum of permanent alimony as awarded to the respondent-wife requires interference or not. 33. In the backdrop of the aforesaid this Court is re- adverting to the impugned judgment of the learned Family Court. 34. For ready reference, the relevant part of impugned judgment so far it relates to the issue of permanent alimony is being quoted as under: “32. The affidavit of assets and liabilities furnished by the petitioner, shows that the petitioner is BE and as per para 34,37 and 38 of his cross-examination (PW1) the petitioner was working as software engineer in a company in Mumbai and he was getting Rs. 60-70 thousand per month as salary and he is filing income tax since 2018 and he has further admitted in para 35 of his cross-examination that during covid period he was working from home that he had to leave in Dec. 2021 but this (leaving job) appears far from truth and cannot be believed. 35. From the aforesaid paragraph it is evident that the learned Family Court while considering the issue of permanent alimony has taken into consideration the petitioner’s affidavit which has been filed in relation to assets and liabilities. Further the learned Family Court has taken into consideration that the petitioner (appellant herein) is the software engineer in a company in Mumbai and he was getting Rs. 60-70 thousand per month as salary and he is filing income tax since 2018. 36. Further the learned Family Court has taken into consideration that the petitioner (appellant herein) is the software engineer in a company in Mumbai and he was getting Rs. 60-70 thousand per month as salary and he is filing income tax since 2018. 36. Thus, from the aforesaid it is apparent that while fixing the quantum of the permanent alimony, the learned Family Court has considered all the parameters, which ought to have been considered by the Court concerned. 37. Further, it is evident that the learned Family Court having considered all the evidences i.e. oral and documentary both, has held that the OP/wife is entitled for Rs. 12,00,000/- (Rs. Twelve Lacs only) as one-time permanent alimony by petitioner/appellant. 38. It needs to refer herein that the law of maintenance is aimed at empowering the destitute and achieving social justice and dignity of the individual. The husband is under a legal obligation to sufficiently provide for his wife. As per settled law, the wife is entitled to be maintained as far as possible in a manner that is similar to what she was accustomed to in her matrimonial home while the parties were together. 39. Thus, in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts and legal proposition as discussed and referred hereinabove, this Court has considered view that learned Family Court has after meticulous examination of all the evidences has properly dealt with the issue involved in this case. 40. Further, this Court, while appreciating the argument advanced on behalf of the plaintiff/appellant on the issue of perversity, needs to refer herein the interpretation of the word "perverse" as has been interpreted by the Hon'ble Apex Court which means that there is no evidence or erroneous consideration of the evidence. The Hon'ble Apex Court in Arulvelu and Anr. vs. State [Represented by the Public Prosecutor] and Anr., (2009) 10 SCC 206 while elaborately discussing the word perverse has held that it is, no doubt, true that if a finding of fact is arrived at by ignoring or excluding relevant material or by taking into consideration irrelevant material or if the finding so outrageously defies logic as to suffer from the vice of irrationality incurring the blame of being perverse, then, the finding is rendered infirm in law. Relevant paragraphs, i.e., paras-24, 25, 26 and 27 of the said judgment reads as under: “24. Relevant paragraphs, i.e., paras-24, 25, 26 and 27 of the said judgment reads as under: “24. The expression “perverse” has been dealt with in a number of cases. In Gaya Din v. Hanuman Prasad, (2001) 1 SCC 501 this Court observed that the expression “perverse” means that the findings of the subordinate authority are not supported by the evidence brought on record or they are against the law or suffer from the vice of procedural irregularity. 25. In Parry's (Calcutta) Employees' Union v. Parry & Co. Ltd. AIR 1966 Cal 31 the Court observed that “perverse finding” means a finding which is not only against the weight of evidence but is altogether against the evidence itself. In Triveni Rubber & Plastics v. CCE, 1994 Supp (3) SCC 665 : AIR 1994 SC 1341 the Court observed that this is not a case where it can be said that the findings of the authorities are based on no evidence or that they are so perverse that no reasonable person would have arrived at those findings. 26. In M.S. Narayanagouda v. Girijamma, AIR 1977 Kant 58 the Court observed that any order made in conscious violation of pleading and law is a perverse order. In Moffett v. Gough (1878) 1 LR 1r 331 the Court observed that a “perverse verdict” may probably be defined as one that is not only against the weight of evidence but is altogether against the evidence. In Godfrey v. Godfrey, 106 NW 814 the Court defined “perverse” as turned the wrong way, not right; distorted from the right; turned away or deviating from what is right, proper, correct, etc. 27. The expression “perverse” has been defined by various dictionaries in the following manner: 1. Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current English, 6th Edn. “Perverse.—Showing deliberate determination to behave in a way that most people think is wrong, unacceptable or unreasonable.” 2. Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English, International Edn. Perverse.—Deliberately departing from what is normal and reasonable. 3. The New Oxford Dictionary of English, 1998 Edn. Perverse.—Law (of a verdict) against the weight of evidence or the direction of the judge on a point of law. 4. The New Lexicon Webster's Dictionary of the English Language (Deluxe Encyclopedic Edn.) Perverse.—Purposely deviating from accepted or expected behavior or opinion; wicked or wayward; stubborn; cross or petulant. 5. Stroud's Judicial Dictionary of Words & Phrases, 4th Edn. Perverse.—Law (of a verdict) against the weight of evidence or the direction of the judge on a point of law. 4. The New Lexicon Webster's Dictionary of the English Language (Deluxe Encyclopedic Edn.) Perverse.—Purposely deviating from accepted or expected behavior or opinion; wicked or wayward; stubborn; cross or petulant. 5. Stroud's Judicial Dictionary of Words & Phrases, 4th Edn. “Perverse.—A perverse verdict may probably be defined as one that is not only against the weight of evidence but is altogether against the evidence.” 41. This Court, based upon the aforesaid discussion, is of the view that the plaintiff/appellant has failed to establish the element of perversity in the impugned judgment as per the discussion made hereinabove so far as it relates to issue of permanent alimony. 42. Thus, this Court, on consideration of the finding arrived at by the learned Family Judge and based upon the aforesaid discussion and settled legal proposition as referred and discussed hereinabove, is of the view that the judgment passed by the learned Family Judge is not coming under the fold of the perversity, since, the conscious consideration has been made of the evidences, as would be evident from the impugned judgment. 43. This Court, therefore, is of the view that the judgment dated 11.07.2023 [decree signed on 18.07.2023] passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Jamtara in Original Suit No. 36 of 2021 needs no interference. 44. As per order dated 15 th July, 2025, the appellant has paid Rs. 6,10,000/- to the respondent-wife. He is further directed to pay the rest of the decreetal amount to the respondent. 45. Accordingly, the instant appeal stands dismissed. 46. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.