Smt. Pushpa Rathore vs Yashwant
2022 Latest Caselaw 16919 MP

                              -1-


      IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                   AT I N D O R E
                              BEFORE
             HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA
                                    &
      HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AMAR NATH (KESHARWANI)
                ON THE 20th OF DECEMBER, 2022
                  FIRST APPEAL No. 144 of 2003

BETWEEN:-
SMT. PUSHPA RATHORE        D/O MADANLAL
RATHORE,     AGED    ABOUT    42  YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HOUSE WIFE, DR/O SHAJAPUR AT
PRESENT R/O TARANA PARGANA TARANA,
DISTRICT UJJAIN (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                                    .....APPELLANT
(SHRI ASHOK KUMAR SURAJMAL GARG, LEARNED SENIOR ADVOCATE
ALONG WITH SHRI ADITYA GARG, LEARNED GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE
FOR THE APPELLANT.)

AND
YASHWANT S/O PREMCHANDRA RATHORE, AGED
ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCCUPATION: MECHANIC, R/O
GAYATRI    NAGAR,    SHAJAPUR   (MADHYA
PRADESH)
                                                   .....RESPONDENT
(SHRI NAVNEET KISHORE VERMA, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE
RESPONDENT.)
       This appeal coming on for judgment this day, JUSTICE VIVEK
RUSIA passed the following:

                           JUDGMENT

[1] The appellant/wife has filed this appeal against the judgment

dated 31.01.2005 passed by I Additional District Judge, Shajapur in Civil Suit No.48/2001 (Hindu Marriage Act) whereby the marriage dated 09.02.2000 has been dissolved by way of divorce. [2] The marriage of appellant and respondent was solemnized on 09.02.2000 under Hindu customs and rituals in Tarana out of marriage they have no issue. It is also an admitted fact that appellant/wife is living in her father's house at Tarana since 11.09.2000. [3] The respondent/husband filed a suit seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty and behaviour of the respondent. According to the respondent there was a vast difference between the standard of living and financial condition of the family of appellant/wife and respondent/husband, therefore, she was not willing to reside with him as wife since beginning and deserted him. The trial Court framed three issues for adjudication and the appellant contested the suit but finally vide judgment dated 31.01.2000 the marriage has been dissolved. Hence, this appeal was filed.

[4] Shri Aditya Garg, learned counsel for the appellant submits that although vide order dated 04.03.2003 this Court has stayed the operation of judgment and decree but the respondent had performed the marriage and now he had two issues therefore, the appellant is not interested in challenging the judgment and decree on merit. The parties were sent for mediation where appellant/wife demanded Rs.10,00,000/- as a permanent alimony but the respondent/husband has denied hence, the matter came up before this Court hence applicant is pressing this appeal claiming alimony.

[5] Shri Garg further submits that the respondent/husband is only

paying Rs.2,500/- as a maintenance which is not sufficient for survival of the appellant/wife. He further adds that earlier she was dependent on her father but now he is no more and she cannot be dependent for remaining of her life on her brothers because they have their own families, therefore, this Court may kindly fix an appropriate amount of alimony payable to appellant/wife.

[6] Shri Navneet Kishore Verma, learned counsel for the respondent submits that so far as the issue of maintenance is concerned, the Apex Court has laid down the guideline in case of Rajesh v/s Neha (2021) 2 SCC 324. The respondent/husband has filed an affidavit to disclose his income, movable and immovable properties therefore, at the most he can pay an sum of Rs.3,00,000/- as permanent alimony and Rs.2,500/- as monthly maintenance. He further submits that the appellant/wife has not filed any affidavit about her income as well as movable and immovable property. She is a practicing advocate since last five to six years and earning for herself. It is further submitted that the respondent/husband is having a daughter who is studying in class 12 th and a son who is studying in class 4 th. The respondent/husband is a motorcycle mechanic by profession and in the city like Shajapur his income is limited. His aged parents are also dependent on him and his monthly income is not more than Rs.25,000/- per month. [7] Keeping in view the facts and change in circumstances in totality, we hereby pass the following order:

I. The judgment and decree dated 31.01.2003 is hereby affirmed by which the marriage held on 09.06.2000 has been dissolved. II. The appellant shall be entitled to get Rs.5,00,000/- as permanent

alimony from the respondent which shall be paid in three installments out of which Rs.2,00,000/- shall be paid within two months from today and remaining amount of Rs.3,00,000/- shall be paid by December, 2023.

III. The respondent/husband shall pay monthly maintenance at the rate of Rs.4,000/- per month which shall be sufficient for maintenance of appellant apart from permanent alimony.

In view of the above, the judgment is modified.

A decree be drawn accordingly.

(VIVEK RUSIA)                                                                  (AMAR NATH (KESHARWANI))
  JUDGE                                                                             JUDGE

Divyansh


RAVI      Digitally signed by RAVI PRAKASH

DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH INDORE, ou=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH INDORE, postalCode=452001, st=Madhya Pradesh, 2.5.4.20=4ab94d84dc5263b30f6f28a2add7abcbb2aa0330ac7397bcd9f

PRAKASH bc95dfaf35905, pseudonym=100608901330D162AC2ABC78EA9AE338F31DCC4E, serialNumber=B4A0E3E988793A97B9DF941C1DC674099011995D1F8 DEE914E3F7CDDD06B9558, cn=RAVI PRAKASH Date: 2022.12.22 15:46:48 +05'30'