Sri Pradip Chandra Das vs Smt. Soma Das
2022 Latest Caselaw 180 Tri

                                  Page 1 of 7


                      HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                             AGARTALA
                        F.A. NO.07 OF 2019

 Sri Pradip Chandra Das,
 S/o - Lt. Pulin Chandra Das,
 Resident of Ichai Natun Bazar,
 P.S.- Kadamtala,
 District- North Tripura.
                                                -----Appellant(s)

                                   Versus

 Smt. Soma Das,
 D/o- Sri Gauranga Das,
 W/- Sri Pradip Chandra Das,
 Resident of Vill & P.O.- Uptakhali,
 P.S. Panisagar,
 District- North Tripura.
                                                  -----Respondent(s)

For the Appellant(s) : Ms. A. Debbarma, Advocate.

For the Respondent(s) : Mr. S. Bhattacharjee, Advocate.

    Date of hearing and delivery of
    Judgment & Order              : 16/02/2022.

    Whether fit for reporting      : YES/NO.




                        BEFORE
         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD
          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH


                J U D G M E N T & O R D E R(ORAL)

(T. AMARNATH GOUD)

This Appeal has been filed under Section 28 of the Hindu

Marriage Act, 1955 read with Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act,

1984, against the Judgment and Decree, dated 29.05.2019 passed

by the learned District Judge, North Tripura, Dharmanagar in Case

No.T.S. (Divorce) 27 of 2017.

2. The facts of the case in brief as stated in the pliant are that

the appellant and the respondent were legally married husband and

wife. The marriage between the appellant-husband and the

respondent-wife took place on 14.03.1999, according to Hindu rites,

rituals, and customs in the house of the parents of the respondent,

situated at Uptakhali, Panisagar, North Tripura. The appellant-

husband and respondent-wife are Hindu by religion and as such,

they are governed by the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

3. The marriage of the appellant and the respondent were

duly consummated and out to their wedlock one daughter was born

to them on 15.03.2002.

4. The appellant is a Post Graduate Teacher and at present,

he is posted at Pratyekroy H.S. School, Dharmanagar. The Appellant

is drawing a monthly salary of Rs.68,575/-.

5. The appellant-husband as petitioner filed a petition under

Section 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for dissolution of

the marriage of the appellant-husband and respondent-wife on the

ground of desertion of the appellant-husband by the respondent-

wife. The said petition for divorce filed under Section 13(1)(ib) of the

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 has been registered as T.S. (Divorce)-

27/2017, in the file of the learned District Judge, North Tripura,

Dharmanagar.

6. The respondent-wife herein entered into appearance before

the learned District Judge, Dharmanagar, North Tripura, and filed a

written statement denying and disputing the allegation of desertion

and contending that it is the appellant-husband who has deserted

the respondent-wife. The respondent-wife also filed an application

under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and under

Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

7. Based on the pleadings, the learned Court framed the

following issues for adjudication of the divorce petition. The issues

are as follows:-

"I. Whether the petitioner is the legally married husband of this respondent, marriage being solemnized on 14.03.1999 according to Hindu rites, customs and rituals at the parental house of the respondent?

II. Whether the petitioner is entitled to get decree of divorce on the ground of desertion?

III. What other relief/reliefs as the parties are entitled to?"

8. On the issues as framed by the appellant-husband as

petitioner in that T.S.(Divorce), he produced three witnesses

including himself who were examined and cross-examined. The

respondent-wife also adduced oral and documentary evidence.

9. After hearing both sides, the learned Court delivered

judgment on 29.05.2019. The learned Court allowed the petition for

divorce filed by the appellant-husband by dissolving the marriage

between the appellant-husband and the respondent-wife by decree

of divorce. The learned Court also directed the appellant-husband to

pay monthly maintenance or Rs.20,000/- to the respondent and

their daughter. The learned counsel also directed the appellant to

make a fixed deposit certificate of Rs.30,00,000/- (Rupees thirty

lakhs) in the name of the respondent-wife and their daughter.

10. Being partly aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the

impugned judgment dated 29.05.2019, passed by the learned

District Judge, North Tripura, Dharmanagar, in T.S. (Divorce) 27 of

2017 in so far the permanent alimony part of the said judgment is

concerned, the appellant-husband hereby preferred the instant

appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act read with Section

19(1) of the Family Court's Act, 1984 and prayed for the following

reliefs:-

"i. Issue notice.

ii. Call for records.

iii. Hear both sides and

iv. After hearing allow the appeal filed under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 read with Section 19(1) of the Family Court's Act, 1984, against the judgment, dated, 29.05.2019, passed by the learned District Judge, North Tripura, Dharmanagar, In T.S. (Divorce)- 27/2017 by modifying the Judgment so far the direction regarding permanent alimony is concerned.

v. The Hon'ble High Court may be kind enough to set aside the direction given by the learned District Judge, North Tripura vide judgment, dated 29.05.2019 passed in

T.S. (Divorce)-27/2017 as far the direction of causing fix deposit of Rs.15 lakh each in favour of the respondent and her daughter is concerned.

vi. The Hon'ble High Court may also kind enough to modify the judgment, dated 29.05.2019, passed in T.S.(Divorce)27/2017 by reducing the amount of monthly maintenance for Rs.20,000/- per month to Rs.8,000/- per month payable by the respondent and her daughter.

The Hon'ble High Court may also pass any further order/orders as may be deemed fit and proper."

11. Heard Ms. A. Debbarma, learned counsel appearing for the

appellant as well as Mr. Sankar Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for

the respondent.

12. Admittedly, the husband and wife are separated and the

daughter is with the mother. The trial Court has fixed the monthly

maintenance and permanent alimony. During the course of the

argument, it is informed that the salary of the appellant-husband is

enhanced from Rs.68,575/- per month to around Rs.78,000/- per

month.

13. Be that as it may since the argument is only advanced on

the point of reduction of the permanent alimony which is fixed by

the Court below on the ground of being excessive and without giving

proper reasons. Admittedly, the husband is employed and has

sufficient means and source of income. So, it becomes his prima

facie responsibility if not divorced to take care of his family,

maintain medical, education, festival, travel, and other expenses

throughout his lifetime and also perform the wedding of the

daughter and further to attend the daughter and her family and her

children all through which would be more than the amount of

alimony fixed by the Court below. Hence, without interfering with

the permanent alimony amount fixed in favour of the daughter, the

amount of Rs.15,00,000/-(Rupees Fifteen Lakhs) is confirmed. In so

far as the permanent alimony of the wife is concerned, this Court

feels that it can be reduced since the future expenditure as indicated

would not be that much amount towards the expenditure as

indicated in respect of the daughter. In view of the same, the

amount of permanent alimony in respect of the wife is considered to

be reduced.

14. After hearing both the parties and perusing the evidence

on record, we are of the considered opinion that the appellant-father

is to deposit Rs.15,00,000/-(Rupees fifteen lakhs) into the account

of the daughter and Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lakhs) is to be

deposited in the account of the respondent-wife. The arrears of

Rs.10,000/- payable toward the daughter from 2017, which

maintenance the appellant-father has not paid all through and the

arrears according to the respondent is Rs.5,20,000/-(Rupees Five

Lakhs twenty thousand), and the same is not disputed by the

appellant, thus the same stands payable by the appellant-husband.

15. When this Court initially indicated that the amount of

permanent alimony is to be deposited within 2(two) months, Ms. A.

Debbarma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner requested

that since the petitioner is a teacher he may not be in a position to

deposit the same within 2(two) months and sought for 6(six)

months. This Court has considered the request and grants 6(six)

months time from today for depositing the amounts. However, it is

made clear that no further extension of time will be granted. In so

far as the arrears of maintenance of Rs.5,20,000/-(Rupees Five

Lakhs twenty thousand) payable by the appellant/father to daughter

is concerned, 1(one) month time is granted to deposit to her

account.

16. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part and disposed of.

         (ARINDAM LODH,J)                     (T. AMARNATH GOUD,J)




      suhanjit