1 2025:CGHC:61468-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCC No. 729 of 2024 Devi Prasad Gupta S/o Late Shri Shrichand Gupta, aged about 46 years, R/o Baniyapara (Near Lal Khambha) Ratanpur, Tahsil Kota, Police Station Ratanpur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ...Applicant Versus Smt. Usha Gupta W/o Deviprasad Gupta, aged about 55 years, D/o Late Shankar Lal Gupta, R/o Near By Maneesh Agrawal’s House, Munnu Lal Primary Govt. School, Police Station City Kotwali, Bilaspur, Tahsil & District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System Software) For Applicant : Ms. Madhunisha Singh, Advocate. For Respondent : Ms. Meenu Banerjee, Advocate. Hon’ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey,J. Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad, J. Order on Board Per Rajani Dubey, J. 17.12.2025 Digitally signed by RAVVA UTTEJ KUMAR RAJU 2 1. The present MCC has been filed seeking modification of the judgment dated 16.07.2024 passed by this Court in FA(MAT) No. 72/2022. 1. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this Court vide judgment dated 16.07.2024 passed in FA(MAT) No. 72/2022 while dismissing the said appeal, held in para 25 as under:- “25. Now coming to grant of alimony to appellant/wife, considering the fact that the respondent/husband is working as a photographer and looking to the status of the parties in order to avoid further litigation between the parties, it would be appropriate to grant a sum of Rs. 10,000/- as monthly alimony to the wife. Accordingly, it is directed that the respondent/husband shall pay alimony of Rs. 10,000/- per month in the account of wife/appellant.” 2. The applicant is seeking modification to the extent that the alimony amounting to Rs. 10,000/- to be payable monthly to the wife be waived off and grant any other relief in the interest of justice and equity, not limited to the complete termination of the maintenance obligations of the applicant. 3. The modification as sought for is not opposed by the learned counsel for the respondent. 4. Upon due consideration and non-objection of counsel for the respondent, the MCC stands allowed to the extent that the para 25 of the order dated 16.07.2024 passed in FA(MAT) No. 72/2022, be read as “ Now coming to grant of alimony to appellant/wife, considering the fact that the respondent/husband is working as a photographer and looking to the status of the parties in order to avoid further litigation 3 between the parties, it would be appropriate to direct the husband to pay the wife a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Only) as permanent alimony, payable in two installments within 06 months. Ordered accordingly.” 5. The copy of this order shall form part of the records of FA(MAT) No. 72/2022. Sd/- Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Judge U.K. Raju