Harekrushna Mohanty vs Smt. Pratima Sahoo @ Mohanty
2022 Latest Caselaw 2903 Ori

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                   MATA No.162 of 2019
            Harekrushna Mohanty                          ....          Appellant
                                      Mr. Gopal Krushna Mohanty, Advocate
                                          -versus-
            Smt. Pratima Sahoo @ Mohanty                 ....        Respondent
                                                   Mr. A.K. Tripathy, Advocate
                        CORAM:
                                   SHRI JUSTICE S. TALAPATRA
                                   SHRI JUSTICE B. P. ROUTRAY
                                       ORDER

28.6.2022 Order No.

10. 1. The matter is taken up through Hybrid mode.

2. Heard Mr. G.K. Mohanty, learned counsel appearing for the

Appellant as well as Mr. A.K. Tripathy, learned counsel appearing

for the Respondent.

3. This is an appeal under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act,

1984 from the judgment dated 19th November, 2019 whereby the

petition filed by the Appellant under Section 13(1)(i) of Hindu

Marriage Act has been dismissed returning the finding that the

Respondent has never treated her husband with cruelty in any

manner nor had she deserted her husband (the present Appellant).

Being aggrieved by the said finding, this appeal has been filed.

4. During pendency of the appeal, there was an attempt by this

court to bring a resolution to the matrimonial discord by mediation.

Hence, the dispute was referred to the Mediation Centre. The

Mediator submitted his report dated 29th April, 2022 to this court. It

has been observed in that report; that as no agreement in respect of

permanent alimony could be arrived at, the mediation did not bring

any resolution. This report has been understood by both the

Appellant and the Respondent, as there is consensus as regards the

dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce, but subject to

determination of the quantum of alimony. But there is nothing on

records, and hence, this court is unable to pass any effective order.

However, from the submission made by the learned counsel

appearing for the Appellant and the Respondent, it appears clearly

that if the permanent alimony is settled using the parameters as laid

down by this court in different decisions, the parties will agree to

divorce. Therefore, counsel for the parties have concentrated to

persuade this court to determine the permanent alimony and to

grant the divorce to the Appellant.

5. Apart that, by a special application filed by the Respondent,

some additional materials have been placed on records to show the

financial strength of the Appellant. It has been asserted that riches

have come to the Appellant after death of his mother who was a

Government employee. Counsel for the parties have urged in

unison that the matrimonial suit should be remanded to the court of

the Judge, Family Court, Cuttack. In the face of this submission, we

are of the view that since the parties are in the half-way mark

towards resolution and they have been stuck as alimony could be

settled, by way of remand, let the process continue. To draw an

abrupt end, would not support any purpose.

6. Accordingly, this suit is remanded with the following

observations:-

i) The judge, Family Court. Cuttack shall allow the parties to

bring the additional evidence, confined to the financial

strength of the Appellant and after such evidence, if any, is

recorded the Judge, Family Court shall determine the

permanent alimony if the parties continue to the approach as

adopted before this court, unless the parties by that time

mutually decide the quantum of alimony. There shall not be

any inhibition to accept such quantum by the Judge, Family

Court.

ii) If the quantum of alimony is so decided by the parties, the

consent terms be recorded and depending thereupon, the

marriage may be dissolved by a decree of divorce.

7. It is made absolutely clear that if the memorandum of consent

terms are not filed in the manner as noted above, the exercise of

quantifying the alimony may be treated as redundant. In that case,

the impugned judgment shall be deemed as restored. No elaborate

judgment in the event will be required to be drawn. For the purpose

of remand, we interfere with the said judgment. It is accordingly,

set aside.

8. In the result this appeal is partly allowed.

9. Draw the decree accordingly.

10. Having regard to the nature of the dispute, the Judge, Family

Court, Cuttack is requested to take all possible efforts to complete

the said civil proceeding, on remand, within a period of six months

from the date when a copy of the order will be received by him.

( S. Talapatra) Judge

( B.P. Routray) Judge B.K.Barik/ M.K.Panda