Jharkhand High Court
Puja Kumari @ Puja Devi vs Niraj Kumar Thakur @ Niraj Thakur on 26 September, 2025
Author: Sujit Narayan Prasad
Bench: Sujit Narayan Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
F.A.No. 123 of 2024
Puja Kumari @ Puja Devi ... ... ... Appellant
Versus
Niraj Kumar Thakur @ Niraj Thakur ... ... Respondent
...
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR RAI
For the Appellant : Mrs. Nalini Jha, Advocate
For the Respondent :
...
Order No.05/dated 26.09.2025
The appeal has been preferred by the wife, the appellant
herein, against the Judgment by which the decree of dissolution
of marriage has been passed.
2. The Co-ordinate Bench while hearing the matter, at the
first instance, had issued notice to the sole respondent-
husband.
3. The Office note dated 09.01.2025 reflects that the service
of notice sent through ordinary post has been received by the
respondent personally as per the detail furnished in flag 'X'.
However, so far as the notice sent through registered post is
concerned, neither A/D nor undelivered registered cover has
been received.
4. The Co-ordinate Bench has heard the matter on 13th
January, 2025. Two orders have been passed, the same date
one on Interlocutory Application being I.A. No. 8083 of 2024
which was filed for condoning the delay of 163 days in filing the
appeal. The Co-ordinate Bench took note of the fact that none
appears on behalf of the respondent in spite of service of notice
upon him. Limitation was condoned by the aforesaid order.
Simultaneously, the appeal has been admitted as also the trial
court record has been called for.
5. The learned Counsel appearing for the appellant has
submitted that although the decree for dissolution of marriage
has been passed and in the meanwhile as per the instruction,
the respondent has solemnized marriage also. Now the question
which is to be considered as to whether while passing the decree
for dissolution of marriage can it be passed without an order of
permanent alimony as required to be passed under Section 25
of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955.
6. It has been contended that for the aforesaid reason, the
respondent did not put his appearance. This Court has gone
through the Judgment passed by the learned Family Judge.
7. Although in the said Judgment altogether four issues have
been framed i.e. is the suit as framed maintainable, whether
the petitioner has valid cause of action, whether the respondent
has meted out cruelty on the petitioner and whether the
petitioner is entitled to a decree for dissolution of marriage
under section 13(1) (i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act. Although
the issue no. (V) is also there to what other relief or reliefs, the
petitioner is entitled but there is no reference or no
consideration by the learned Family Judge on the issue of
permanent alimony as is required to be considered on the basis
of the mandate of Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
This Court, therefore, is of the view that the appearance of
respondent-husband is necessary hence the direction is being
passed, in order to secure the appearance of the respondent-
husband, for the ends of justice. As such let notice be issued
upon the respondent-husband which is to be sent through the
S.P., Jamshedhpur, Singhbhum East.
8. Let the requisites be filed within one week after Puja
holidays. The Office is to do needful.
9. Mr. Ashutosh Anand, learned State Counsel is being
requested to effect the notice through S.P., Jamshedpur upon
the respondent-husband.
10. Accordingly, let this matter be listed after four weeks i.e.
on 06.11.2025.
11. Only for the purpose of effecting the notice, the
requirement is there on the next date to apprise this Court.
12. Let the name of Mr. Ashutosh Anand be reflected in the
daily cause list.
(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)
(Arun Kumar Rai, J.)
Dated 26th September, 2025
P.K.S./Suman
