Patna High Court
Renu Devi @ Pinki vs Abhijat Kumar @ Pawan @ Pawan Kumar on 30 April, 2025
Author: Sunil Dutta Mishra
Bench: P. B. Bajanthri, Sunil Dutta Mishra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Appeal No.827 of 2018
======================================================
Renu Devi @ Pinki wife of Abhijat Kumar @ Pawan @ Pawan Kumar,
Resident of Village- Sikandara, P.O. Pinki, P.S. Silao, District Nalanda, at
present Renu Devi @ Pinki, daughter of Ramashray Prasad, Resident of
Village- Mirdahachak, P.S. Harnaut, District Nalanda.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
Abhijat Kumar @ Pawan @ Pawan Kumar son of Ganauri Prasad, Resident
of Village- Sikandara, P.O. Pinki, P.S. Silao, District Nalanda.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Mishra, Advocate.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Uma Shankar Sharma, Advocate.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA
C.A.V. JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA)
Date : 30-04-2025
Heard both the parties.
2. This Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed against
the judgment/order dated 13.08.2018 and decree dated
18.08.2018
passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court,
Nalanda at Bihar Sharif in Divorce Case No. 151 of 2013
whereby the learned Family Court has allowed the divorce case
filed by the respondent-husband under Section 13 (1) (ia) and
(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
3. The case of the respondent-husband in brief is
that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on
22.03.2009 according to Hindu rites and customs. After marriage
Patna High Court MA No.827 of 2018 dt.30-04-2025
appellant-wife lived together with the respondent-husband for
about 30 days, after bidagari she went to her parental house with
her parents. Gradually, the behaviour and attitude of the
appellant-wife changed and she used to be very stubborn. Both
the parties, out of their wedlock, were blessed with a female
child 'Shreya Kumari' on 31.07.2012, who is presently in the
custody and care of appellant-wife. The respondent-husband was
subjected to mental and physical cruelty by the appellant-wife
and she left the company and society of her husband without his
consent. It has been alleged that the appellant-wife refused to
make physical relationship with the respondent-husband. On
10.07.2013, the respondent-husband went to bring the appellant-
wife back to her matrimonial house, but she refused and hurled
abusive language and made false complaint of dowry torture
against the respondent-husband. Further, the appellant-wife filed
a Complaint Case No. 344(C) of 2014 under Sections 498A, 406,
and 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 against the respondent-
husband and his family members in which they were granted
bail, such registration of criminal case is after filing of divorce
case in the year 2013. The relationship between the appellant
and respondent has been irretrievably broken down and there is
no hope of any restoration of their relationship. The respondent-
husband sought decree of divorce from the learned Family Court
Patna High Court MA No.827 of 2018 dt.30-04-2025
vide Divorce Case No. 151 of 2013.
4. The appellant-wife appeared and filed written
statement wherein she denied the allegations alleged by the
respondent-husband. It is stated that she had cordial relationship
with in-laws when she stayed at her matrimonial home during
initial days of their marriage. It is further stated that the
respondent-husband and his family members were not happy
with the gifts received at the time of their marriage and they were
pressurizing the appellant-wife for dowry of Rs. 5 Lakhs. The
respondent-husband got a job as a constable in BMP-6 at
Muzaffarpur in the year 2013. Thereafter, she was harassed time
and again by the respondent-husband and his family members.
The appellant-wife always lived with love and affection with her
husband and his family members but was tortured for fulfillment
of dowry demand.
5. In view of facts and circumstances and materials
available on record learned Family Court, Nalanda at Bihar
Sharif noted that both the parties are living separately having no
cohabitation between them. It is held that the act of the wife
amounts to cruelty and the wife had deserted the respondent-
husband so the husband is entitled to a decree of divorce. The
marriage is accordingly dissolved and the suit has been decreed
vide impugned judgment/order dated 13.08.2018 and decree was
Patna High Court MA No.827 of 2018 dt.30-04-2025
issued on 18.08.2018.
6. It is evident that the relationship between the
parties has strained which is marked by frequent discord. Upon
bringing the respondent back form her parental home, she stayed
with the petitioner for a short period and even during that period,
the relationship between them lacked cordiality and harmony, as
there was no healthy marital cohabitation and has progressively
deteriorated over time. Although a daughter was born out of the
wedlock, the parties have been living separately for more than
twelve years. They have levelled serious allegations against each
other and have been engaged in continuous litigation since their
separation. There is a clear absence of intention on either side to
resume cohabitation or revive the matrimonial bond. Although,
the appellant-wife contended that she wanted to resume her
conjugal life. However, due to prolonged separation, nature of
disputes, pendency of litigation, and mutual unwillingness to
reconcile are sufficient evidence that the marriage has
irretrievably broken down.
7. It is also relevant to mention here that the
respondent-husband stated that subsequent to the decree of
divorce granted by the learned Family Court, the respondent-
husband entered into his second marriage with Anchal Kumari @
Nitu Kumari on 10.03.2019 and from the second marriage, they
Patna High Court MA No.827 of 2018 dt.30-04-2025
are now blessed with two children. The respondent-husband is
paying monthly maintenance of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. 7,000/- per
month to appellant and Rs.3,000/- per month to their daughter)
vide order dated 02.05.2018 in Maintenance Case No. 30(M) of
2014. It is further stated that the respondent-husband has
deposited Rs. 9,72,000/- out of Rs. 12,70,000/- as total
maintenance amount till November, 2024, and the remaining
arrears amount is being paid by him monthly. Moreover, the
respondent-husband, in compliance of order dated 11.11.2024 by
this Court, deposited Rs. 2,00,000/-for educational expenses of
their daughter and Rs. 25,000/- for litigation cost in the bank
account of the appellant-wife.
8. Learned counsel for the parties conceded that in
view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the relationship
between the appellant-wife and the respondent-husband has
irretrievably broken down. Both the parties are residing
separately since more than 12 years and there is no hope of any
restoration of their conjugal relationship and Anchal Kumari @
Nitu Kumari's life would ruin. In view of subsequent
development, it is in the interest of justice that instead of
deciding the appeal on merit this case may be disposed of by
granting permanent alimony to be paid to appellant-wife by the
respondent-husband. The appellant-wife proposed Rs. 25 Lakhs
Patna High Court MA No.827 of 2018 dt.30-04-2025
as one time settlement amount with respect to her permanent
alimony. Learned counsel for the parties submitted to decide the
quantum of permanent alimony to be paid by respondent-
husband to appellant-wife in the facts and circumstances of the
case.
9. In view whereof, the only point to be decided by
this Court is "what is a reasonable amount to be paid by the
respondent-husband to the appellant-wife for her claim towards
permanent alimony in the facts and circumstances of this case."
10. Learned counsel for the appellant-wife
submitted that the respondent-husband is employed as a
constable and his monthly salary is Rs. 48,567/- and the
appellant-wife has no source of income. She is dependent upon
the respondent-husband and the minor daughter is residing with
the appellant-wife. The respondent-husband being father has
legal and moral obligations to maintain his minor daughter and to
provide maintenance including her educational and marriage
expenses. It is further submitted that the respondent-husband is
aged about 36 years, having 24 years of remaining service
period, taking his retirement age to be 60 years read with
promotion prospects in the service, the proposal of Rs.25 Lakhs
as one-time settlement is just and reasonable.
11. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-
Patna High Court MA No.827 of 2018 dt.30-04-2025
husband submitted that he has no land property and on partition
only 3.5 decimal agricultural land would come into his share.
The respondent-husband is presently paying Rs. 10,000/- per
month (Rs.7,000/- for appellant-wife and Rs.3,000/- for minor
daughter) as their maintenance amount. After decree of divorce,
he has again solemnized marriage with Anchal Kumari @ Nitu
Kumari from whom they have been blessed with two children
and the respondent-husband has to maintain them as well, apart
from his old-aged parents. He further submitted that the
respondent-husband is ready to make payment of just and
reasonable one-time amount with respect to permanent alimony.
12. Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955,
provides for the grant of permanent alimony and maintenance to
a spouse following the dissolution of marriage to ensure that the
spouse who is financially dependent is not rendered destitute or
without means of sustenance post-separation. The intent of the
legislature in enacting this provision is to offer necessary
financial support and social security to the affected spouse. It is
not intended to penalize or to impose undue burden on the other
party. The relief under Section 25 is thus remedial in nature,
aimed at balancing equity and fairness between the parties,
keeping in view their respective circumstances. The question
arises that what are the factors to be consider for determination
Patna High Court MA No.827 of 2018 dt.30-04-2025
of quantum of permanent alimony.
13. The law is now well-settled that there cannot be
a fixed formula for determination of quantum of permanent
alimony. In the case of Rajnesh v. Neha reported in (2021) 2
SCC 324, the Hon'ble Supreme Court laid down a detailed and
structured framework for determining the amount of
maintenance, particularly focusing on the aspect of permanent
alimony. The Court outlined a comprehensive set of factors to be
considered in such determinations across all matrimonial
proceedings. This guiding framework has been subsequently
affirmed and reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kiran
Jyot Maini v. Anish Pramod Patel, reported in 2024 SCC
OnLine SC 1724 wherein while discussing the husband's
obligation to maintain the wife and the importance of his
financial capacity in deciding the quantum, observed under para
26 that:-
"26. Furthermore, the financial
capacity of the husband is a critical factor in
determining permanent alimony. The Court shall
examine the husband's actual income, reasonable
expenses for his own maintenance, and any
dependents he is legally obligated to support. His
liabilities and financial commitments are also to be
considered to ensure a balanced and fail
maintenance award. The court must consider the
husband's standard of living and the impact of
inflation and high living costs. Even if the husband
claims to have no source of income, his ability to
Patna High Court MA No.827 of 2018 dt.30-04-2025
earn, given his education and qualifications, is to
be taken into account. The courts shall ensure that
the relief granted is fair, reasonable, and consistent
with the standard of living to which the aggrieved
party was accustomed. The court's approach should
be to balance all relevant factors to avoid
maintenance amounts that are either excessively
high or unduly low, ensuring that the dependent
spouse can live with reasonable comfort post-
separation."
14. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in Pravin Kumar
Jain v. Anju Jain reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3678,
examined various precedents to clarify the legal position
concerning the determination of permanent alimony. The Court
emphasized the necessity of considering relevant factors to
ensure that the amount awarded is just, fair, and reasonable. In
paragraph 31 of the judgment, it has been held as under:
"31. There cannot be strict guidelines or a
fixed formula for fixing the amount of
permanent maintenance. The quantum of
maintenance is subjective to each case and is
dependent on various circumstances and
factors. The Court needs to look into factors
such as income of both the parties; conduct
during the subsistence of marriage; their
individual social and financial status; personal
expenses of each of the parties; their individual
capacities and duties to maintain their
dependents; the quality of life enjoyed by the
wife during the subsistence of the marriage;
and such other similar factors. This position
was laid down by this Court in Vinny Paramvir
Parmar v. Paramvir Parmar, and Vishwanath
Agrawal v. Sarla Vishwanath Agrawal."
15. The Hon'ble Apex Court, taking note of
Patna High Court MA No.827 of 2018 dt.30-04-2025
Rajnesh v. Neha (supra) and Kiran Jyot Maini (supra), in
para 32 of Pravin Kumar Jain (supra) laid down the following
eight factors to be looked into in deciding the quantum:
"i. Status of the parties, social and
financial.
ii. Reasonable needs of the wife and the
dependent children.
iii. Parties' individual qualifications and
employment statuses.
iv. Independent income or assets owned by
the applicant.
v. Standard of life enjoyed by the wife in
the matrimonial home.
vi. Any employment sacrifices made for the
family responsibilities.
vii. Reasonable litigation costs for a non-
working wife.
viii. Financial capacity of the husband, his
income, maintenance obligations, and
liabilities.
These are only guidelines and not a
straitjacket rubric. These among such other
similar factors become relevant."
16. Duration of the marriage is one of the relevant
factors in determining the permanent alimony. The conduct of the
party seeking the relief is also relevant in determining the
quantum of permanent alimony. The three-judges Bench of
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sukhdev Singh v.
Sukhbir Kaur reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 299, observed
in para 26 as under:
"26. .....We must note that sub-section 1 of Section
25 uses the word "may". A grant of a decree under
Section 25 of the 1955 Act is discretionary. If the
Patna High Court MA No.827 of 2018 dt.30-04-2025
conduct of the spouse who applies for maintenance
is such that the said spouse is not entitled to
discretionary relief, the Court can always turn
down the prayer for the grant of permanent alimony
under Section 25 of the 1955 Act. Equitable
considerations do apply when the Court considers
the prayer for maintenance under Section 25. The
reason is that Section 25 lays down that while
considering the prayer for granting relief under
Section 25, the conduct of the parties must be
considered."
(emphasis supplied)
17. In the present case, the parties are living
separately for more than 12 years. The respondent-husband is
employed as a constable in Bihar Special Armed Police and he
earns a monthly salary of Rs.48,567/-. Also, he has no assets in
his name except 3.5 decimal agricultural land share in the
ancestral land property. Moreover, the appellant-wife is totally
dependent upon respondent-husband for her maintenance.
18. It is a well-settled principle of Hindu law that a
father has a legal and moral obligation to maintain his unmarried
daughter if she is unable to maintain herself. This obligation
extends beyond mere subsistence and includes the reasonable
expenses of her marriage, which are now recognized as forming
part of the concept of 'maintenance'. The right of an unmarried
daughter to claim marriage expenses from her father is thus no
longer confined to custom or tradition, but has been conferred the
status of a legal right. This responsibility is personal in nature
Patna High Court MA No.827 of 2018 dt.30-04-2025
and arises by virtue of the parental relationship itself.
Furthermore, a father who resides separately from his wife and
daughter cannot, by reason of such separation alone, evade or be
absolved of this statutory and moral duty.
19. Accordingly, the respondent-husband shall
continue to pay the monthly enhanced maintenance amount of
Rs.7,000/- from Rs.3,000/-, w.e.f. 01.05.2025, since 7 years have
lapsed from 02.05.2018, the date on which a sum of Rs.3,000/-
was awarded vide order dated 02.05.2018 passed in Maintenance
Case No.30 (M) of 2014 to the daughter with liberty to file
petition for her marriage expenses at the relevant time.
20. Keeping in view of the fact that the appellant-
wife is residing separately for last 14 years from respondent-
husband and it has not been brought on any documentary
evidence to show that she has no any other source of income
other than maintenance amount granted by the Court.
Considering the financial capacity, age, conduct, obligation and
liabilities, period of separation and such other ancillary factors as
stated above, we feel it appropriate to grant permanent alimony
to the tune of Rs.20 Lakhs to be paid by the respondent-husband
as one time settlement with respect to her permanent alimony
within a period of four months from the date of passing of this
judgment.
Patna High Court MA No.827 of 2018 dt.30-04-2025
21. It is hereby clarified that the aforesaid amount
shall not preclude or otherwise affect the right of the daughter of
the parties to inherit property, if any, to which she may be legally
entitled.
22. Further, it is clarified that arrears amount to be
calculated and to be payable to appellant and her daughter for
their maintenance in Maintenance Case No. 30(M) of 2014 till
the date of this judgment shall be paid by the respondent-husband
without fail and at the earliest.
23. This Miscellaneous Appeal stands disposed of
with aforesaid directions.
24. Pending I.A's., if any, stands disposed of.
(Sunil Dutta Mishra, J)
I am on the same page
(P. B. Bajanthri, J)
(P. B. Bajanthri, J)
Ritik/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE 20.02.2025
Uploading Date 30.04.2025
Transmission Date NA
