[2026:RJ-JP:4176-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 871/2021 Smt. Suman W/o Shri Kuldeep Singh, D/o Shri Shishupal, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Khedra Ki Dhani, Titanwad, Tehsil Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu (Rajasthan), Presently Residing At Kanika Ki Dhani, Tehsil Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu (Rajasthan.) ----Appellant Versus Kuldeep Singh S/o Shri Sardar Singh, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Khedra Ki Dhani, Tan Titanwad, Tehsil Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu (Rajasthan) ----Respondent Connected With D.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 459/2021 Kuldeep Singh Son Of Sardari Lal, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Khedron Ki Dhani, Tan Titanwad, Tehsil Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu (Raj) ----Appellant Versus Smt. Suman Wife Of Kuldeep Singh Daughter Of Shishupal, R/o Khedron Ki Dhani, Tan Titanwad, Presently R/o Kanika Ki Dhani, Tehsil Udaipurwati, District Jhunjhunu ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Dr. Arpan Kumar Sharma, Ms. Anu Joshi for Mr. O. P. Jhajharia, respondent in (CMA No.459/2021) For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ajay Kumar Tanenia, Mr. Himanshu Danodia appellant in (CMA No.459/2021) HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP TANEJA Judgment 29/01/2026 1. Vide judgment dated 04.02.2021, passed in civil misc. case No.671/2018 by the Family Court, Jhunjhunu, marriage of parties [2026:RJ-JP:4176-DB] (2 of 4) [CMA-871/2021] dated 16.05.2017 was dissolved and a lump-sum amount of permanent alimony of Rs. 4,00,000/-, was determined payable by husband to wife and minor daughter jointly as one time settlement. 2. Wife has preferred D.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.871/2021 seeking enhancement of the amount of permanent alimony whereas husband has preferred D.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.459/2021 feeling aggrieved by the decree of dissolution of marriage. 3. During course of arguments, it has transpired that after dissolution of marriage dated 04.02.2021, wife has re-married one Dharmendra Jat on 28.06.2021 and has been living at her new matrimonial home with her daughter. 4. In view of above development of marital status of wife, husband does not want to pursue his appeal No.459/2021 and is agreeable to sustain the judgment and decree of dissolution of his marriage dated 16.05.2017. No challenge to the permanent alimony determined by Family Court, has been made by husband. 5. In the appeal filed by wife, it appears that a composite petition for divorce as well as permanent alimony under Section 13(1)(i-a) and 25 of Hindu Marriage Act, was filed by wife and her minor daughter jointly before Family Court. In the evidence of wife, she has not deposed any statement, in respect of quantum of permanent alimony nor has produced any material to support her claim of permanent alimony. Nevertheless, taking into account the qualification of both parties, their living standard and financial conditions, Family Court determined Rs. 4,00,000/- as lump-sum amount against permanent alimony, payable to wife and minor [2026:RJ-JP:4176-DB] (3 of 4) [CMA-871/2021] daughter jointly by husband. Even in the appeal, no additional document or other material has been placed on record by wife, for seeking enhancement of such amount of permanent alimony. 6. It has been pointed out wife and husband both are qualified and have acquired degree of M.A., B.Ed. and are in private job. 7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of wife instead of pressing for enhancement, pointed out that during course of pendency of divorce petition, an interim order dated 12.06.2019 was passed by the Family Court under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, directing husband to pay Rs.3,000/- per month interim maintenance and Rs.200/- per date as litigation expenses. Learned counsel submits that no amount of interim maintenance and litigation expenses, pursuant to the order dated 12.06.2019, has been paid nor the amount of permanent alimony Rs. 4,00,000/-, in furtherance to the judgment dated 04.02.2021 has been paid. Thus the grievance of wife is fundamentally in respect of non payment of permanent alimony and arrears of interim maintenance and litigation expenses. 8. We find it difficult to consider the issue of enhancement of amount of permanent alimony on account of non-production of any evidence and other material by wife, despite giving opportunity, neither before the Family Court nor before the High Court at appellate stage, moreso, it is an admitted and undisputed fact that wife has entered into remarriage and is living with her minor daughter at her new matrimonial home. 9. In respect of non-payment of the arrears of interim maintenance and expenses pendente-lite, as ordered by the Family Court vide interim order dated 12.06.2019 and non- [2026:RJ-JP:4176-DB] (4 of 4) [CMA-871/2021] payment of the permanent alimony of Rs. 4,00,000/-, as ordered by the Family Court in the judgment dated 04.02.2021, wife is obviously at liberty to recover such amount by way of execution proceedings in accordance with law. 10. With the aforesaid observations and liberty to appellant-wife but without interfering in the judgment dated 04.02.2021, D.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.871/2021, filed by wife, stands disposed of and D.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.459/2021, filed by husband, stands dismissed as not pressed. 11. Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of. 12. Record of the Family Court be sent back forthwith. (SANDEEP TANEJA),J (SUDESH BANSAL),J PCG/15-16