Gauhati High Court
Sri Jimbaram Basumatary vs Smti. Dipanjali Roy Basumatary on 16 August, 2021
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010062382019
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case : Mat.App./30/2019
SRI JIMBARAM BASUMATARY
S/O- SRI DOEL BASUMATARY
R/O- KOKRAJHAR TOWN
WARD NO. 4 (J.D. ROAD)
P.O. AND DIST.- KOKRAJHAR (BTC)
ASSAM
PIN- 783370.
VERSUS
SMTI. DIPANJALI ROY BASUMATARY
W/O- SRI JIMBARAM BASUMATARY
R/O- VILL.- PADMABIL
P.O. STHANA
GOSSAIGAON
DIST.- KOKRAJHAR (BTAD)
ASSAM
PIN- 783360.
------------
Advocate for : MR. M U MAHMUD
Advocate for : MR M BARUAH appearing for SMTI. DIPANJALI ROY
BASUMATARY
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA
ORDER
Date : 16-08-2021
Page No.# 2/4
Suman Shyam, J
Heard Mr. M.U. Mahmud, learned counsel for the appellant. We have also heard Mr.
P.K. Das, learned counsel for the respondent.
This matrimonial appeal is preferred by the husband assailing the order dated 15-
05-2019 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge (FTC), Kokrajhar in Title Suit (D) No.
08/2016 granting a decree of divorce and also directing the appellant to pay monthly
maintenance of Rs. 25,000/- to the respondent (wife) until further order. The impugned
judgment has been assailed by the appellant's counsel primarily by urging that the
findings as regards income/ property of the appellant is not based on any material
available on record. Moreover, the learned court below has not considered the income/
property of the respondent. Notwithstanding the same, by recording cryptic finding in
paragraphs 16 and 17 of the judgment, a direction has been passed to pay monthly
maintenance of Rs. 25,000/- to the respondent until further order.
On a careful scrutiny of the impugned order, we also find that there is no specific
finding of fact recorded on the basis of evidence available on record indicating the income
of the appellant or the quantum/ value of his landed property. There is also no finding of
fact recorded in the impugned order as regards the property of the respondent, if any.
Dehors such finding, a direction has been issued to pay monthly maintenance of Rs.
25,000/- until further order. As such, it is evident that the finding recorded as regards the
financial capability of the appellant vis-à-vis the respondent (wife) is perverse and
therefore, calls for interference by this Court.
Page No.# 3/4
The learned counsel for both sides have invited the attention of this Court to the
decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Crl. Appeal No. 730/2020 arising out of SLP
(Crl.) No. 9503/2018 in the case of Rajnesh Vs. Neha & Anr. wherein, it has been
held that both the parties are required to file affidavits of assets and liabilities so as to
enable the learned court below to record a proper finding of fact on the financial status of
the parties. Therefore, they would have no objection, if the matter is remanded back to
the learned court below by setting aside the impugned judgment and order insofar as the
same relates to the direction to pay maintenance to the respondent and decide the issue
afresh on the basis of materials available on record.
Taking note of the submission of learned counsel for both sides, we hereby set
aside the order dated 15-05-2019 insofar as the same relates to the direction of payment
of monthly maintenance of Rs. 25,000/-.
The decree of divorce granted by the learned court below, however, would remain
disturbed, since the same has not been assailed before this Court by either party.
Both the parties to accordingly appear before the learned court below on 04-09-
2021 and produce a certified copy of this order. On such appearance, the learned court
below shall fix a date requiring both the sides to file affidavit as per the directions
contained in Rajnesh (Supra).
Subject to filing such affidavit within the time stipulated by the Court, learned court
below may proceed to decide by a reasoned order, the question of permanent alimony
and/ or maintenance, if any, to be paid by the appellant (husband) to the respondent
Page No.# 4/4
(wife) by a reasoned order.
The aforesaid exercise be completed as expeditiously as possible, preferably within
a period of 03 months from of date of filing of the affidavits. Until such time, the matter is
finally decided, the appellant to continue to pay the interim maintenance as per order
dated 22-04-2019 passed in I.A.(C) No. 1340/2019 arising out Mat. Appeal No. 17/2019.
With the above observation this appeal stands disposed of.
JUDGE JUDGE
GS
Comparing Assistant
