Gangadhar Hembram vs Raimat Hembram And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 10454 Ori

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK
Date: 31-Aug-2023 16:29:32




                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                            RPFAM NO.270 OF 2019
                               Gangadhar Hembram               ....                    Petitioner
                                                                   Miss Rashmi Pradhan, Advocate
                                                     -versus-
                               Raimat Hembram and another                   ....     Opp. Parties
                                          CORAM:
                                          JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
                                                  ORDER

          Order No.                              30.08.2023
             1.           1.        This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2. Judgment dated 22nd August, 2019 passed by learned Judge, Family Court, Baripada in Criminal Proceeding No.76 of 2015 is under challenge in this RPFAM, whereby the Petitioner has been directed to pay maintenance of Rs.2,000/- to the Opposite Party No.1 per month and Rs.1,000/- per month to the Opposite Party No.2 from the date of the order.

3. Although an application for condonation of delay in IA No.465 of 2019 has been filed, but SR indicates that there is no delay in filing the RPFAM. Thus, Miss Pradhan, learned counsel being authorized by Mr. Biswal, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that no order need be passed in the IA. Accordingly, the IA is disposed of as not pressed.

4. Miss Pradhan, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that Opposite Party No.1 is not the legally married wife of the Petitioner. Thus, the question of birth of Opposite Party No.2 out of their wedlock does not arise. It is her submission that the Petitioner has married to one Budhini Hembram, who was examined as OPW-3. Although Opposite Party No.1 claimed that she married to the Petitioner on 25th December, 2011, but the

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed // 2 // Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA CUTTACK Date: 31-Aug-2023 16:29:32

marriage between the Petitioner and Budhini Hembram was solemnized on 29th September, 2011. Opposite Party No.1 could not also establish that the Petitioner had ever married to her. Only because an allegation is made that their marriage was solemnized on 25th December, 2011 as per Hindu customs and thereafter, they led their marital life and the Opposite Party No.2 was born out of their wedlock, the same cannot be sacrosanct to come to the conclusion that the Opposite Party No.1 is the legally married wife of the Petitioner. Marriage between the Petitioner and Budhini Hembram was solemnized on 29th September, 2011. Thus, the marriage, if any with the Opposite Party No.1 is void. These aspects were not considered by learned Judge, Family Court while passing the impugned order. Hence, she prays for issuance of notice to the Opposite Parties in the matter.

5. Although the matter was filed on 6th November, 2019, but no step has yet been taken to get the matter listed for admission. There is no documentary evidence available on record to come to a conclusion that the Petitioner had ever married to Budhini Hembram. It also appears that learned Judge, Family Court considering the materials on record has come to a conclusion that Opposite Parties are entitled to maintenance as stated above. It further appears that the quantum of maintenance is not unreasonable. Hence, I am not inclined to issue notice in the matter to the Opposite Parties that too after lapse of almost four years.

6. Accordingly, the RPFAM is dismissed.

s.s.satapathy

(K.R. Mohapatra) Judge