Sri N V Manjunath vs Smt Priyanka
2023 Latest Caselaw 6902 Kant

                             -1-




   IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
      DATED THIS THE 03RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023
                         PRESENT
         THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.NARENDAR
                            AND
      THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL
               M.F.A. NO.1259 OF 2020 (MC)
BETWEEN

SRI. N.V. MANJUNATH
S/O SRI. CHIKKEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
R/AT. NARANAHALLI VILLAGE
DODDABELAVANGALA HOBLI
DODDABALLAPURA TALUK-561204.
                                              ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. NANJUNDA SWAMY N, ADV.,)

AND

1 . SMT. PRIYANKA
    D/O SRI. HANUMANTHAPPA
    AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS
    R/AT NARANAHALLI VILLAGE
    DODDABELAVANGALA HOBLI
    DODDABALLAPURA TALUK-561204.
    PRESENTLY R/AT
    C/O SRI. JAGADISH
    NO.1076, 1ST FLOOR
    3RD CROSS, 2ND MAIN
    SIDDHAGANGA NILAYA
    KALYANAGAR, T. DASARAHALLI
    BENGALURU-560059.
                                             ...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. K.P. JAYASIMHA, ADV.,)

     THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 28(1) OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT,
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 08.01.2020
PASSED IN MC NO.16/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, DODDABALLAPUR, PARTLY
ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SECTION 13 (1)(i)(i-a)
OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT.
                              -2-




      THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED ON
20.09.2023, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF
JUDGMENT, THIS DAY, VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL J., DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:

                         JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed under Section 28(1) of the Hindu

Marriage Act, 1955 against the judgment and decree dated

08.01.2020 passed in M.C.No.16/2018 by the Senior Civil

Judge & JMFC, Doddaballapur, (hereinafter referred to as,

'the Family Court') by which the petition filed by the

appellant-husband under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu

Marriage Act, 1955 seeking dissolution of marriage on the

ground of cruelty was allowed. The present appeal by the

appellant-husband seeking to set aside the impugned

judgment and decree insofar as directing the appellant to

pay Rs.20,00,000/- towards the marriage expenses and

permanent alimony.

2. Brief facts giving rise to filing of this appeal are

that the marriage between the appellant and the respondent

was solemnized on 18.01.2015 at Doddaballapur town. The

appellant-husband has filed petition under Section 13 of the

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking for dissolution of

marriage on the ground of cruelty. The said petition was

opposed by the respondent-wife by filing statement of

objections. The Family Court has dissolved the marriage

solemnized between the parties. The Family Court has

directed the appellant to pay the marriage expenses amount

of Rs.10,00,000/- to the respondent-wife and the permanent

alimony of Rs.10,00,000/-. The present appeal by the

appellant-husband is seeking to set aside the award of

marriage expenses and permanent alimony. In the aforesaid

factual matrix the present appeal is filed.

3. Sri.N.Nanjundaswamy, learned counsel

appearing for the appellant-husband submits that the

Family Court has committed grave error in awarding

marriage expenses of Rs.10,00,000/- and permanent

alimony of Rs.10,00,000/- to the respondent-wife without

considering the capacity of the appellant-husband to pay the

said amount. It is submitted that the Family Court has

failed to appreciate the fact that the appellant-husband is

not employed and has no independent source of income to

pay the said amount. The appellant-husband is deriving a

meager income from the agricultural activity and is unable

to pay the huge amount awarded by the Family Court. It is

further submitted that the Family Court has failed to

appreciate the fact that the respondent-wife has completed

her graduation out of the money of the parents of the

appellant-husband and she is an Engineering graduate

working in a private company, drawing handsome salary of

Rs.60,000/- per month and the appellant-husband has no

such source of income. It is also submitted that despite

several panchayats, the respondent-wife failed to rejoin the

matrimonial home which has compelled the appellant to file

the petition seeking for dissolution of marriage and without

any fault of the appellant, the Family Court has directed the

appellant to pay the marriage expenses and the alimony to

the respondent-wife. It is contended that the respondent-

wife is a close relative of the appellant's family and the entire

marriage expenses were borne by the appellant and his

parents, hence the question of spending any money by the

respondent-wife's family towards the marriage ceremony

would not arise. It is further contended that the respondent

has not placed any evidence to substantiate her claim for

marriage expenses, on the contrary the appellant-husband

has produced choultry rent receipt as Ex.P-3, which shows

that the father of appellant has paid Rs.25,000/- towards

choultry rent. The Family Court without considering these

aspects has proceeded to award the marriage expenses. It is

also contended that the Family Court has erred in taking

note of the documents at Exs.R-1 to R-10 - the RTCs, the

lands reflected in the RTCs are situated in different places,

they are dry lands and only eucalyptus trees are grown on

them and there is no regular source of income from the said

lands. Hence, he seeks to set aside the impugned judgment

and decree insofar as award of marriage expenses and

permanent alimony to the respondent-wife is concerned.

4. Per contra, Sri.K.P.Jayasimha, learned counsel

for the respondent-wife supports the impugned judgment

and decree passed by the Family Court and submits that the

award of marriage expenses of Rs.10,00,000/- is based on

the evidence available on record. It is submitted that the

Family Court has assigned detailed reasons for awarding

permanent alimony of Rs.10,00,000/- in favour of the

respondent-wife. It is submitted that the appellant-husband

is a businessman and also having vast agricultural lands at

different places and those agricultural lands are near to

Doddaballapur town having non-agricultural potentiality. It

is further submitted that the appellant is not a stranger to

the respondent; they are related to each other and due to

incompatibility, they started living separately, the Family

Court considering this aspect has dissolved the marriage.

The appellant and his parents are financially well placed,

having movable and immovable properties, hence, the award

of marriage expenses and the alimony is very meager and

does not call for any interference in the present appeal.

Hence, he seeks to dismiss the appeal.

5. We have heard the learned counsel for the

appellant-husband, learned counsel for the respondent-wife,

perused the memorandum of appeal and the Family Court

records.

6. The dispute in the present appeal is only with

regard to award of Rs.10,00,000/- as marriage expenses and

Rs.10,00,000/- as permanent alimony to be paid to the

respondent-wife by the appellant-husband. It is also not in

dispute that the respondent is none other than the daughter

of brother of the appellant's mother. The marriage between

the appellant and respondent was solemnized on

18.01.2015. The respondent-wife in her evidence has clearly

stated that it is her family members, who have performed

the marriage and incurred expenses amounting to

Rs.30,00,000/- since the respondent is the only daughter to

her parents. It is further deposed that the parents of the

respondent have given gold ornaments, clothes, bracelets,

necklace, chain, watch and silver articles and cash of

Rs.10,00,000/- as a customary practice to the appellant. It

is also deposed that the appellant and his family members

are having weighing bridge in the name and style of

"Lakshmi Weigh Bridge" at Doddaballapura, "Lakshmi

Weighers", Doddabelvangala, "Lakshmi Weighers",

Koratagere, "Lakshmi Weighers", Muddalinganahalli, and

having agricultural properties bearing Sy.No.57 measuring

to an extent of 0.07 guntas, Sy.No.58/2 measuring to an

extent of 0.05 guntas, Sy.No.58/1 measuring to an extent of

0.05 guntas, Sy.No.58/3 measuring to an extent of 0.06

guntas, Sy.No.59 measuring to an extent of 0.21 guntas,

Sy.No.45/7 measuring to an extent of 0.05 guntas,

Sy.No.45/6 measuring to an extent of 0.05 guntas,

Sy.No.45/3 measuring to an extent of 0.17 guntas,

Sy.No.45/5 measuring to an extent of 0.05 guntas,

Sy.No.45/1 measuring to an extent of 0.06 guntas,

Sy.No.50/5 measuring to an extent of 0.06 guntas,

Sy.No.35/2 measuring to an extent of 1.26 guntas,

Sy.No.34/1 measuring to an extent of 1.00 guntas,

Sy.No.45/2 measuring to an extent of 1.23 guntas,

Sy.No.50/9 measuring to an extent of 1.24 guntas,

Sy.No.47/1 measuring to an extent of 1.14 guntas and

Sy.No.46 measuring to an extent of 0.23 guntas, all the

properties are commercial properties are situated abutting

National Highway at Naranahalli village, Doddabelavanagal

Hobli, Doddaballapura Taluk and they have got more than

ten sites around Doddaballapura and two residential houses

at Doddaballapura, in all sources, the petitioner having

income of more than Rs.25,00,000/- per month. The

aforesaid assertion of the respondent-wife is based on the

documentary evidence as the respondent-wife has placed

Exs.R1 to R10 which has been seriously denied by the

appellant. The evidence on record clearly establishes that

the appellant has the sufficient means of income to pay the

awarded alimony.

7. The Family Court has recorded the categorical

finding in paragraph Nos.22 to 28 and 32 to 33 of the

judgment that the father of the respondent-wife has received

compensation from the State authorities for having acquired

his land and the said amount has been used for the purpose

of performing the marriage of his daughter, the aforesaid

finding of the Family Court is based on evidence available on

record and there is no reason to disbelieve the same. The

appellant has examined Sri.Marishamaiah as PW-2, on

perusal of the testimony of the said witness, no where he

has deposed that the marriage expenses were incurred by

the appellant-husband and his parents. Hence, the assertion

of the appellant that they have incurred the marriage

expenses is without any merit.

8. Insofar as award of permanent alimony of

Rs.10,00,000/- to the respondent-wife is concerned, the

respondent has placed on record the oral as well as

documentary evidence to substantiate her claim for

permanent alimony. The appellant has made oral assertion

that the respondent-wife is gainfully employed in private

company at Bengaluru, however no material is placed before

the Family Court to substantiate the said assertion. The

respondent-wife has claimed Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One

- 10 -

Crore only) as permanent alimony, however the Family

Court, based on the evidence available on record and

keeping in mind the income and expenditure of the

appellant, has awarded permanent alimony of

Rs.10,00,000/-, which in this Court's considered view is just

and proper and does not call for any interference. The

amount awarded is for rest of her life, the respondent is aged

about 30 years, by any stretch of imagination cannot be

termed as higher permanent alimony.

9. This Court is conscious of the fact that while

granting the permanent alimony the Courts are required to

keep in mind various factors like social status of the parties,

paying capacity of the husband, income if any of the wife,

the dependents on the parties to the proceedings, cost of

living and standard of living. This Court is of the view that

while determining the permanent alimony, by the Court, it is

required, to take note of various considerations. There

cannot be any arithmetical formula for determining the

permanent alimony to the spouse, the award of permanent

alimony depends on case to case basis and based on

available material before it. In a peculiar facts and

- 11 -

circumstances of the case keeping in mind the material

available on record, this Court is of the considered view that

the award of marriage expenses and the permanent alimony

by the Family Court is just and proper and do not call for

any interference in this appeal.

10. For the aforementioned reasons, we do not find

any error or infirmity in the findings recorded by the Family

Court in the impugned judgment and decree calling for

interference in the present appeal. For the aforementioned

reasons, we do not find any merit in the present appeal,

accordingly, the same is dismissed.

No order as to costs.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Sd/-

JUDGE

BSR