Alok Kumar vs Smt. Anupama Singh
2025 Latest Caselaw 4115 Patna

Patna High Court

Alok Kumar vs Smt. Anupama Singh on 14 October, 2025

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                Miscellaneous Appeal No.996 of 2018
======================================================
Alok Kumar Son of Shri Hare Krishna Singh, Resident of Mohalla- Near
Marhipur Railway Crossing, Power House Road, Police Station- Kaazi
Mohammadpur, District- Muzaffarpur.

                                                         ... ... Appellant/s
                                  Versus

Smt. Anupama Singh Wife of Alok Kumar, D/o of Uma Shankar Prasad
Singh, Resident of Mohalla- Near Marhipur Railway Crossing, Power House
Road, Police Station- Kaazi Mohammadpur, District- Muzaffarpur, Currently
at Juran Chhapra, Road No. 1, Near Kejriwal Hospital, Police Station-
Brahmapura, P.O. Main Post Office, District- Muzaffarpur.

                                          ... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s    :    Mr. Sriram Krishna, Advocate
                            Mr. Prabhat Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s   :    Mr. Vivek Prasad, Advocate
                            Ms. Y. Madhavi, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
                    And
          HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH
               CAV JUDGMENT
    (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH)

Date : 14-10-2025

             Heard the parties.

             2. The appellant-husband (Alok Kumar) has come

 up in this appeal against judgment and decree dated

 11.09.2018

passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family

Court, Muzaffarpur in Matrimonial (Divorce) Case No.

211 of 2013 whereby the petition filed by the appellant

under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

(in short 'the 1955 Act') seeking dissolution of marriage by Patna High Court MA No.996 of 2018 dt.14-10-2025

a decree of divorce, has been dismissed.

3. Succinctly, the marriage of appellant- Alok

Kumar was solemnized with respondent-Anupma Singh on

2nd December 2010 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. The

marriage was solemnized and performed at Lichhavi

Hotel, Imlichatti, Muzaffarpur. The marriage was duly

consummated; however, no child was born from the

wedlock.

4. The pleaded case of appellant-husband in his

petition filed under Section 13 (1)(i-a) of the 1955 Act was

that appellant was employed in Merchant Navy. The

marriage with the appellant was arranged one. The case of

the appellant, in short is that appellant got married with

respondent Anupma Singh on 02.12.2010 according to

Hindu rites and rituals. The marriage was solemnized and

performed at Lichhavi Hotel, Imlichatti, Muzaffarpur. It is

further alleged that after the marriage, respondent came to

her Sasural on 03.12.2010 where she was warmly

welcomed by the appellant's parents and relatives and she

was offered valuable goods including cash and gold

ornaments. The behavior of the respondent since the date Patna High Court MA No.996 of 2018 dt.14-10-2025

of the marriage with the appellant and other in-laws was

bad and the appellant anyhow continued to live with the

respondent for 15 days. It is further alleged that respondent

started pressurizing the appellant to go to her paternal hose

and she stopped taking food and sometimes she abused the

appellant and his family members. Lastly, on 28.01.2011,

the respondent went to her Maike along with her brother

taking all her articles without any information. By this act

of the respondent, appellant felt humiliation and he also

made complaint to his in-laws but the family members of

the respondent did not respond. It is further alleged that on

30.01.2011, the appellant visited to the parental house of

the respondent and requested her to join him at his house

but she refused then appellant came back to his house and

went to his place of posting on 31.01.2011. It is further

alleged that the father of the appellant regularly visited to

the paternal house of the respondent about her well being

but respondent did not behave properly with the father of

the appellant and respondent was not ready to come back

to her Sasural, rather she remained abusive with the

appellant and other family members. It is alleged that Patna High Court MA No.996 of 2018 dt.14-10-2025

when the appellant returned from his service to his house

on leave, at that time also, the respondent was in her

parental house and she did not join the appellant in her

matrimonial house and on request by the appellant to his

in-laws to send respondent to her matrimonial house, the

same was refused and told that she would never back to

her Sasural. It is further alleged that the behavior of the

respondent with the appellant was never good after

28.01.2011 and she kept the appellant away from herself

and whenever the appellant tried to pursue her, she used to

abuse the appellant and threatened that if he insisted

further to go to her Sasural, she would commit suicide and

get him and his family members in jail. The respondent

deliberately denied for any cohabitation with the appellant

about for the last two and half years as respondent is living

at her paternal house without any rhyme and reason and by

this attitude of the respondent, the appellant suffered great

mental shock and he is gradually becoming sick while

respondent is enjoying at her parents house. The further

case of the appellant is that by way of last chance, he

along with his father and relatives came to the parental Patna High Court MA No.996 of 2018 dt.14-10-2025

house of the respondent on 30.05.2013 and requested her

to go along with him but she refused. The appellant,

thereafter arranged a Punchayati where the respondent

flatly refused to live with the applicant. The matrimonial

relation between the appellant and respondent has already

irretrievably broken down and there is no hope of

restoration of their conjugal life. Hence, the divorce

petition was filed by the appellant for dissolution of

marriage between the parties.

5. The respondent-wife appeared and filed her

written statement and submitted that the instant case is fit

to be dismissed as it is not maintainable either in eye of

law or on fact. It is further submitted that marriage of the

appellant with the respondent was solemnized on

02.12.2010 and she stayed at her matrimonial home till 10

February 2011. She has alleged that at the time of the

marriage, appellant was working as Marin Engineer at

Varun Shipping and after return of the appellant to his

place of posting, in-laws family members subjected her to

the worst type of cruelty on small issues. The allegation

made about abusive behaviour is totally incorrect rather Patna High Court MA No.996 of 2018 dt.14-10-2025

she was subjected to abuse and assault by the members of

the appellant's family. It is further asserted that in the

absence of the appellant, the in-laws drove her out from

the matrimonial house. The appellant never intervened

regarding ill behaviour by his family members with the

respondent. The father of the respondent was in

government service and to the best of his ability, he

fulfilled the demand and after marriage also, he fulfilled

the dowry demand. The father of the respondent had

booked a flat in Sahara City Home Centre at Gaziabad in

the name of his daughter (respondent) and after having

came to know about this, the appellant and his family

members mounted pressure upon her to sell the flat. The

respondent was initially not interested to take refund of the

deposited money against the booked flat, but in order to

satisfy the demands of her in-laws, she sold the property

and she could earn respect for sometime till she was able

to meet the requirements of the sale proceeds of the flat. It

is further alleged that respondent tolerated all humiliation

and insult for the safeguard of her marriage but the

behavior of the in-laws became bad to worst when the Patna High Court MA No.996 of 2018 dt.14-10-2025

entire money of the sale proceeds of the flat was

exhausted. It is further alleged that in the month of

December 2011, the respondent was driven out forcefully

and the appellant also maintained distance from her and

supported the misdeeds of his family members. The father

of appellant is an alcoholic and after consuming liquor he

used to pass lewd comments and indecent abuses against

the respondent and there was none in the family who can

support her in absence of her husband. It is further alleged

that appellant is now Captain of the ship and he can keep

the respondent with him but he never cared for taking her

to his place of posting and now, he has developed interest

outside his marriage and extra marital relationship was

becoming deeper day by day and that is why her husband

is not willing to keep her at her place of posting. It is also

asserted that the income of the appellant is about one crore

per annum but he is hardly taking interest to financially

support his legally wedded wife who is totally dependent

upon him. The respondent denied to have any Punchayati

held on 30.05.2013 and also denied that she has left the

matrimonial home, to the contrary she alleged that she was Patna High Court MA No.996 of 2018 dt.14-10-2025

not allowed to stay at her matrimonial house and even she

was not allowed by the appellant to live with him at his

place of posting. It is further alleged that being a

traditional lady she can not think to live without her

husband or to dissolve the marriage. Hence, the respondent

prays to dismissed the matrimonial suit filed for

dissolution of marriage.

6. On conclusion of the trial and considering the

material evidences available on record, learned Principal

Judge, Family Court, Patna held that the appellant-

husband has not established his case for divorce on the

ground of cruelty and desertion. Accordingly, the

matrimonial suit, filed for dissolution of marriage has been

dismissed on contest. The appellant-husband, aggrieved by

the said judgment of the learned Family Court filed the

instant appeal before this Court.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant-husband

submits that the learned Family Court has erred in law and

facts both in not allowing the divorce petition filed by the

appellant-husband. The marriage of the appellant with the

respondent was solemnized on 02.12.2010 according to Patna High Court MA No.996 of 2018 dt.14-10-2025

Hindu rites and rituals. The marriage was consummated

though no child was was born out of the wedlock. The

behavior of the respondent since the date of the marriage

with the appellant and other in-laws was bad and the

appellant anyhow continued to live with the respondent for

15 days. Lastly, on 28.01.2011, the respondent went to her

Maike along with her brother taking all her articles without

any information. On 30.01.2011, the appellant visited to

the parental house of the respondent and requested her to

join him at his house but she refused then appellant came

back to his house and went to his service place on

31.01.2011. The appellant and other in-laws family

members of the respondent made all efforts to bring the

respondent back to her matrimonial house but all their

efforts went in vein. The respondent deliberately denied

for any cohabitation with the appellant about for the last

two and half years as respondent is living at her paternal

house without any rhyme and reason and by this attitude of

the respondent, the appellant suffered great mental shock

and he is gradually becoming sick while respondent is

enjoying at her parents house. It is further submitted that Patna High Court MA No.996 of 2018 dt.14-10-2025

the appellant along with his father and relatives came to

the parental house of the respondent on 30.05.2013 and

requested her to go along with him but she refused. The

appellant, thereafter arranged a Punchayati where the

respondent flatly refused to live with the applicant. It is

further alleged that after filing of the present divorce

petition, as a counter blast and for the sake of vengeance

and with a mala fide intention, the respondent has filed

Domestic Violence Complaint Case No. 847 of 2015

before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur. She

has also filed Complaint Case No. 1158 of 2015 against

the appellant and other in-laws family members on

15.05.2015 under Sections 498(A) and other provisions of

the Indian Penal Code, in which they are on bail.

8. Learned counsel further submits that appellant-

husband is paying Rs. 10,000/- per month to the

respondent as maintenance in pursuance to the order of

learned Family Court dated 12.09.2013. The order-sheets

of learned Court below clearly demonstrates that several

efforts were made by the Court below to reconcile the

issue between the appellant and the respondent, but it was Patna High Court MA No.996 of 2018 dt.14-10-2025

the respondent, who does not want to reconcile the issue

with the appellant. Learned counsel also submits that due

to the lackadaisical approach of the respondent, the dispute

could not be settled before the Mediation Center of this

Hon'ble Court also.

9. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

appellant-husband has brought on record by way of

affidavit, the proposal for permanent alimony wherein the

appellant has offered Rs. 50 lakhs to the respondent as

permanent alimony.

10. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

respondent-wife, however, has not accepted the proposal

of permanent alimony of the appellant-husband and

submits that appellant-husband is getting salary of Rs. 1

crore per annum and keeping in view the income of the

appellant-husband and the dependency of the respondent-

wife completely on her old aged persons, an amount of Rs.

50 lakhs does not appear to be appropriate. The

respondent, however, agrees for mutual divorce, if

appellant is ready to pay Rs. 90 lakhs as permanent

alimony.

Patna High Court MA No.996 of 2018 dt.14-10-2025

11. Considering the submissions advanced on

behalf of the appellant-husband and the respondent-wife,

we find that the marriage between the appellant-husband

and respondent-wife have irretrievably been broken and

forcing them to continue their matrimonial relationship

will be an abuse of the process of law where both sides

does not want to continue their matrimonial relationship.

12. Accordingly, the judgment and decree dated

11.09.2018 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family

Court, Muzaffarpur in Matrimonial (Divorce) Case No.

211 of 2013 is hereby set aside and the marriage between

the appellant and the respondent which was solemnized on

02.12.2010 is dissolved by a decree of divorce.

13. Registry is directed to prepare the decree

accordingly.

14. So far as grant of permanent alimony to the

respondent-wife is concerned, it is useful to refer to

Section 25 of the 1955 Act, which reads thus:-

"Section 25. Permanent alimony and maintenance: (1) Any Court exercising jurisdiction under this Act may, at the time of passing any decree or Patna High Court MA No.996 of 2018 dt.14-10-2025

at any time subsequent thereto, on application made to it for the purpose by either the wife or the husband, as the case may be, order that the respondent shall pay to the appellant for her or his maintenance and support such gross sum or such monthly or periodical sum for a term not exceeding the life of the applicant as, having regard to the respondent's own income and other property, if any, the income and other property of the applicant (the conduct of the parties and other circumstances of the case), it may seem to the Court to be just, and any such payment may be secured, if necessary, by a charge on the immovable property of the respondent."

15. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of

Rajnesh v. Neha reported in (2021) 2 SCC 324, provided

a comprehensive criterion and list of factors to be looked

into while deciding the question of permanent alimony.

This judgment lays down an elaborate and comprehensive

framework necessary for deciding the amount of

maintenance in all matrimonial proceedings, with specific Patna High Court MA No.996 of 2018 dt.14-10-2025

emphasis on permanent alimony and the same has been

reiterated by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kiran Jyot Maini

v. Anish Pramod Patel reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC

1724.

16. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of

Pravin Kumar Jain v. Anju Jain reported in 2024 SCC

OnLine SC 3678 has taken note of the various judgments

to clarify the position of law with regard to determination

of permanent alimony and the factors that need to be

considered in order to arrive at a just, fair, and reasonable

amount of permanent alimony. In para 31 it is 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 Patna High Court MA No.996 of 2018 dt.14-10-2025

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."

17. The Hon'ble Apex Court, taking note of

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. Patna High Court MA No.996 of 2018 dt.14-10-2025

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."

18. It is pertinent to mention here that duration of

the marriage i.e., how long the marriage existed is also a

relevant factor in determining the quantum of permanent

alimony. Generally, marriages that lasts more than 10

years are entitled to be granted a lifetime alimony. The

Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajnesh v. Neha (supra) in para

74 observed that:-

"74. In contemporary society, where several marriages do not last for a reasonable length of time, it may be inequitable to direct the contesting spouse to pay permanent alimony to the applicant for the rest of her life. The duration of the marriage would be a relevant factor to be taken into consideration for determining the permanent alimony to be paid."

Patna High Court MA No.996 of 2018 dt.14-10-2025

(emphasis supplied)

19. The conduct of the party seeking the relief is

also relevant. 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 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) Patna High Court MA No.996 of 2018 dt.14-10-2025

20. Section 25 of the 1955 Act itself envisages

that the wife can initiate proceedings for grant of

permanent alimony even after the decree of divorce.

Therefore, the court does not become functus officio with

the passing of the decree and continues to have jurisdiction

to award alimony even thereafter.

21. Keeping in view the totality of circumstances

and to do justice to the parties, we are of the considered

view that while keeping it open to the appellant-wife to

institute her claim for grant of permanent alimony before

the court of competent jurisdiction, we deem it appropriate

to grant some amount towards Interim permanent alimony

subject to any final decision to be taken by the concerned

court on an application to be filed under section 25 of the

1955 Act by the appellant-wife.

22. Be it stated, while granting permanent

alimony, no arithmetic formula can be adopted as there

cannot be mathematical exactitude. It shall depend upon

the status of the parties, their respective social needs, the

financial capacity of the husband and other obligations. In

"Vinny Parmvir Parmar v. Parmvir Parmar", (2011) 13 Patna High Court MA No.996 of 2018 dt.14-10-2025

SCC 112: (2011) 3 RCR (Civil) 900: 2011 (4) Recent

Apex Judgments (R.A.J.) 357, while dealing with the

concept of permanent alimony, this Court has observed

that while granting permanent alimony, the Court is

required to take note of the fact that the amount of

maintenance fixed for the wife should be such as she can

live in reasonable comfort considering her status and the

mode of life she was used to be when she lived with her

husband. At the same time, the amount so fixed cannot be

excessive or affect the living condition of the other party.

23. Be that as it may, it is the duty of the Court to

see that the wife lives with dignity and comfort and not in

penury. The living need not be luxurious but

simultaneously she should not be left to live in discomfort.

The Court has to act with pragmatic sensibility to such an

issue so that the wife does not meet any kind of man-made

misfortune.

24. This Court finds that appellant-husband is

working as Master in Merchant Navy and getting Rs.

5,00,000/- to 6,00,000/- per month, a details of which has

been mentioned in the supplementary affidavit filed on Patna High Court MA No.996 of 2018 dt.14-10-2025

behalf of the appellant-husband. Apart from the salary, the

appellant has also possesses ancestral properties. The

appellant-wife has still not re-married with anyone. The

appellant has no issue. She is solely dependent on her old

aged parents. The appellant has no other source of income

and she is getting a maintenance amount of Rs.10,000/-

per month as awarded by the Family Court.

25. This Court, while hearing the present petition

has observed in para 1, 2, and 3 of the order dated

12.12.2024 which reads as under :-

"Respective parties are living separately for more than one decade. The respondent had filed petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and thereafter it was dismissed in the year 2015 during the pendency of the Matrimonial (Divorce) Case No. 211 of 2013..

2. The respondent has not taken further steps so as to show her bona fide in joining her husband. In the absence of such interest shown by her, it is necessary to apprise the respective parties for settlement. In this regard both the appellant and respondent are hereby directed to file Patna High Court MA No.996 of 2018 dt.14-10-2025

their assets and liabilities in the form of affidavit in the light of the Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Rajnesh vs. Neha reported in (2021) 2 SCC 324 read with Aditi alias Mithi vs. Jitesh Sharma reported in (2023) SCC Online SC 1451 before the next date of hearing. They are hereby directed to exchange such affidavit in advance.

3. The appellant counsel is hereby directed to take note of latest Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Pravin Kumar Jain vs. Anju Jain reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3678 (Paragraph No. 32) where the Hon'ble Supreme Court has formulated certain factors for the purpose of considering the permanent alimony. On this issue, he is hereby directed to give tentative proposal for permanent alimony with a particular amount so as to examine on the next date of hearing."

26. We have also observed in para 2 of the order

dated 18.01.2025 which reads as under:-

" 2. Be that as it may, Appellant has offered an amount of Rs. 50 lakhs as a Patna High Court MA No.996 of 2018 dt.14-10-2025

permanent alimony and one time settlement. In this regard, Respondent-Smt. Anupama Singh is requested to furnish her counter proposal. If there is any settlement with reference to proposal and counter proposal of one time permanent alimony, in that event, we need not examine correctness and details of the assets and liabilities filed on behalf of the Appellant.

27. While hearing the present appeal on

11.04.2025 we have observed thus:-

"Pursuant to our earlier recording the fact that Appellant has offered a sum of Rs. 50 lakhs. Today, learned counsel for the respondent, on instruction, submitted that Respondent is furnishing counter offer of Rs. 90 Lakhs plus one residential accommodation.

Therefore, matter is required to be adjudicated on merits with reference to assets and liabilities read with the fact that how long both were living in a matrimonial home."

28. Accordingly, after going through the entire

facts of this case, we deem it appropriate to grant an Patna High Court MA No.996 of 2018 dt.14-10-2025

amount of Rs. 90,00,000/- (Rupees Ninety Lakhs Only)

towards Permanent Alimony to be paid by appellant-

husband to the respondent-wife. Let the said amount be

paid by appellant-husband to the respondent-wife within a

period of six months from today; failing which the said

amount shall carry simple interest @ 6% per annum.

29. Accordingly M.A. No. 996 of 2018 stands

disposed of with the aforesaid direction. No order as to

costs.

30. Pending I.A(s), if any, stand disposed of.

( S. B. Pd. Singh, J)

(P. B. Bajanthri, CJ)

Shageer/-

AFR/NAFR                AFR
CAV DATE                11/04/2025
Uploading Date          14/10/2025
Transmission Date       N/A