IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
MATA No. 251 OF 2023
M.N.K.Harish .... Appellant
Mr.A.K.Patro, Adv.
-versus-
M.Srivalli .... Respondent
CORAM:
JUSTICE BISWANATH RATH
JUSTICE M.S.SAHOO
ORDER
01.09.2023 Order No.
02. 1. This matter is taken up through virtual High Court, Ganjam at Berhampur.
2. Heard learned counsel for the Appellant.
3. This Matrimonial Appeal involves a challenge to the order of the Judge, Family Court, Rayagada decreeing the matrimonial proceeding brought by the Respondent-Wife herein thereby dissolving the marriage on 10.06.2019 between the parties in the grant of decree for divorce along with payment of permanent alimony at Rs.14,00,000/-(Rupees Fourteen Lakh) required to be paid by the Appellant-Husband herein within two month from the judgment.
Page 1 of 4
// 2 //
4. In the process of argument, learned counsel for the Appellant-Husband even though brings the Appeal to challenge the decree in both grant of divorce as well as permanent alimony, attempted to satisfy such challenge through the evidence, however, on the reading of paragraph-12, recording through paragraph-12 of the impugned judgment at page-31 of the brief, this Court finds the observation of the Family Court therein reads as follows:-
<The respondent in his counter has mentioned that though petitioner has filed case for dissolution of marriage but the appropriate relief is judicial separation. The respondent though claims to have filed a case for Restitution of Conjugal Rights but in this Court, in his counter has submitted that the appropriate relief to the parties to be judicial separation. His contradictory pleas in different Courts speak about his conduct and volumes about his attitude towards petitioner. Judicial separation would not dissolve the marital ties between the parties. Considering the cruelty narrated by the petitioner and proved, it would not be safe for the petitioner to have conjugal life with the respondent.
If the petitioner is compelled to continue conjugal life with respondent it may risk her life, limb and safety. The appropriate relief would be separation by dissolving the marriage between the parties. The petitioner is entitled to dissolution of her marriage with respondent by decree of divorce.= Reading the aforesaid, this Court observes there is almost consensual decree of divorce. Further material also reveals that there has been establishment of torture involving another proceeding vide RPFAM No. 181 of 2022 arising out of CRP No. 12 of 2021 as revealed in Paragraph-11. On above count, this Court finds, there is no case made out involving this Appeal in the Page 2 of 4 // 3 // challenge of decree of divorce. However, considering the Appellant pursues his Appeal remedy also on the grant of permanent alimony at Rs.14,00,000/-(Rupees Fourteen Lakh), this Court entertains the Appeal only on the permanent alimony aspect and admit the Appeal. Admission of the Appeal will however be subject to deposit of a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakh) in this Court by way of Bank Draft in the name of Registrar(Judicial) of High of Orissa at least within a period of two weeks. This Court also clarifies failure of the deposit; the Appeal shall stand dismissed without reference to the Bench. Further, in the event such deposit comes on the Record, the Registry shall do well in keeping such amount in fixed deposit with maximum interest bearing in any Nationalised Bank with auto renewal clause. Requisites, on the limited admission of the matter be filed by 08.09.2023. The desired draft be filed in the Registry of this Court within two weeks, as undertaken.
(Biswanath Rath) Judge (M.S.Sahoo) Judge Page 3 of 4 // 4 // ORDER Order No. 01.09.2023
02. I.A. No. 260 of 2023
1. Issue notice as above.
2. Accept one set of process fee.
(Biswanath Rath) Judge (M.S.Sahoo) Judge Utkalika Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: UTKALIKA NAYAK Designation: Junior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 04-Sep-2023 18:15:53 Page 4 of 4