Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 21278 (JHR)

Gautam Mishra S/o Gyanendranath Mishra v. Preeti Mishra W/o Gautam Mishra

2026-02-02

Arun Kumar Rai, Sujit Narayan Prasad

body2026
JUDGMENT : SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, J. 1. The instant appeal, under Section 19(1) of the Family Court Act, 1984, is directed against the order/judgment dated 22nd August, 2024 and decree signed on 6th September, 2024 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Deoghar in Original Suit No. 217 of 2023, whereby and whereunder, the suit filed by the petitioner-appellant [husband] for dissolution of marriage by decree of divorce u/s 13(1)(i-a)(i-b) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 against respondent/wife, has been dismissed. 2. The brief facts of the case, leading to filing of the divorce petition by the appellant-petitioner, as taken note in the impugned order, needs to be referred herein, which reads as under: 3. The appellant-husband was married with the respondent on 05.12.2012 according to Hindu rites and customs and after marriage the respondent was living with him in his house and blessed with a son on 20.11.2013 from their wedlock. 4. It is contended that after some days the respondent was not willing to reside with him in his house on account of differences in her life style and temperament and ultimately she left his house on 11.04.2017 and went to her parent's house and since then she is not living with him and living separately from him. 5. The further case of the appellant-husband is that he and his parents made several attempts to bring his wife back to his house and restore their conjugal rights but his wife is not willing to come back his house and refused to return with him and on the contrary his wife filed criminal cases against him for the offence u/s 498(A) of I.P.C. bearing Complaint Case No. 342/2017 and also filed a maintenance case u/s 125 of Cr.P.C. bearing Maintenance Case No. 77/2019. 6. It is contended that his wife tortured him and his parents by abusing them and throwing the meal upon them during the stay period of his wife at his house and she never liked to be bed partner since the year 2013 and subjected the appellant to extreme cruelty. 7. 6. It is contended that his wife tortured him and his parents by abusing them and throwing the meal upon them during the stay period of his wife at his house and she never liked to be bed partner since the year 2013 and subjected the appellant to extreme cruelty. 7. The further case of the appellant is that he made payment of Rs.5,00,000/-to the respondent-wife on the direction of this Court, while granting anticipatory bail to the appellant in A.B.A. No. 5469/2018 in a case filed by the respondent for the offence u/s 498(A) of Indian Penal Code, subject to adjustment towards the amount of full and final settlement of the parties. 8. Besides, the appellant is also paying Rs. 10,000/- per month to the respondent in the maintenance case through Bank Account transfer without any relationship since 11.04.2017, as per the direction of the competent court. 9. The specific case of the appellant is that since 11.04.2017 they are living separately and since then no physical relation has been made to his wife and all attempts were made in vain for restoration of their marital life, hence the appellant has filed the instant suit for dissolution of their marriage through the process of the Court. 10. On being noticed the respondent appeared and filed her written statement stating therein that the suit is not maintainable either in law or in facts and denied the allegations made in the plaint and prayed that the suit may be dismissed with cost. 11. After hearing both the parties, the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Deoghar framed issues for adjudication of the case and after framing the issues both the parties have directed to adduce evidence on their behalf. 12. The appellant has examined altogether three witnesses in his support as P.W.1 Gautam Mishra, the appellant himself, P.W.2 Gyanendranath Mishra and P.W.3 Md. Akhtar Hussain whereas the respondent has examined three witnesses in her support as O.P.W.1 Sudhakar Patralekh, O.P.W.2 Shivnath Jha and O.P.W.3 Preeti Mishra, the respondent herself. 13. Apart from the above oral evidence certain documents were also exhibited on behalf of both the parties. 14. Akhtar Hussain whereas the respondent has examined three witnesses in her support as O.P.W.1 Sudhakar Patralekh, O.P.W.2 Shivnath Jha and O.P.W.3 Preeti Mishra, the respondent herself. 13. Apart from the above oral evidence certain documents were also exhibited on behalf of both the parties. 14. The learned Principal Judge, family court, after appreciating the evidence adduced on behalf of parties, came to the conclusion that the petitioner-husband, the appellant herein, could not prove the ingredients of cruelty and desertion against the respondent-wife, as such it was held that the petitioner-husband is not entitled to get a decree of divorce, against which, the instant appeal has been preferred. 15. Before this Court, on being noticed, the respondent-wife has appeared and contested the appeal. 16. However, learned counsel for the parties, on instruction has submitted that the both the parties are willing to live as husband and wife, as such the matter may be referred before the Mediator for mediation. 17. This Court considering the aforesaid submission has referred the matter before the JHALSA for mediation, as would appear from order dated 14.07.2025. For ready reference, order dated 14.07.2025 is quoted as under: “1.The present appeal has been listed for the purpose of Referral to the Special Mediation Drive-Mediation "For the Nation'. 2. Mr. Nityanand Prasad Choudhary, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, has submitted that the appellant is willing to keep the respondent-wife with him, as such, it has been submitted that the matter may be referred for mediation for settlement in terms of reunion. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-wife has submitted that the respondent-wife is also willing to live with husband and, as such, the matter be referred for mediation. 4. Learned counsel for both parties have submitted that what has been submitted by them is on the basis of the instruction of the respective clients. 5. Considering the aforesaid submission, let this matter be referred to the aforesaid Special Drive-Mediation 'For the Nation', so as to be placed before the Mediator.” 18. Pursuant to order dated 14.07.2025, the mediation was held but it failed, as would appear from mediation report kept at flag M with the note of learned Mediator that „despite of my efforts the mediation at this stage could not be materialized and the same is unsuccessful.? 19. Thereafter the matter was placed before this Court on 5th January, 2026. 20. 19. Thereafter the matter was placed before this Court on 5th January, 2026. 20. During course of argument, learned counsel for the parties has submitted that there is no chance of re-union as such submission has been made for settlement of the matter in terms of permanent alimony. Therefore, in the light of judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Rajnesh vs. Neha & Anr . (2021) 2 SCC 324 , this Court directed learned counsel for the appellant-husband to file affidavit giving therein the details of salary, bank statement showing the details of salary and other perks, annexing therewith the salary slip and bank statement as also the details of movable and immovable property. 21. In terms of order dated 5th January, 2026, the affidavit has been filed by appellant-husband. However, it has been stated by learned counsel for the respondent-wife that she is not a working lady and she is anyhow surviving on the interim maintenance as awarded by the Court amounting to Rs. 10,000/- with his 12 years son born out of the wedlock of appellant and respondent. The fact about non-working of the respondent has not been disputed by learned counsel for the appellant either orally or by filing affidavit. 22. Today, when the matter has been taken up, the parties have agreed for one time settlement in terms of permanent alimony and made argument in support thereof. 23. The question is that when both the parties are not at all interested to live together then this Court cannot compel them to live together. 24. However, since the appellant is interested in settling the dispute in terms of money [permanent alimony], which has been agreed by learned counsel for the respondent, therefore, this Court is taking the plea in this regard. But the amount which has been offered is not acceptable to the respondent stating that it is not sufficient for sustenance of the respondent-wife and son, who is 12 years male child taken birth from their wedlock. Submission of the learned counsel for the appellant: 25. Learned counsel for the petitioner-appellant has submitted that he is working on the post of Technician-III, Electrical Department of Chittaranjan Locomotive Works, Chittaranjan, from which he is currently getting gross salary of Rs. 53,240/-. 26. Submission of the learned counsel for the appellant: 25. Learned counsel for the petitioner-appellant has submitted that he is working on the post of Technician-III, Electrical Department of Chittaranjan Locomotive Works, Chittaranjan, from which he is currently getting gross salary of Rs. 53,240/-. 26. It has further been contended that he had made payment of Rs.5,00,000/- [five lakhs] to the respondent on direction of this Court, when this Court granted anticipatory bail to the appellant in A.B.A. No. 5469/2018 in a case filed by the respondent for offence u/s 498(A) of Indian Penal Code, subject to adjustment towards the amount of full and final settlement of the parties. However, in the said case he was later on acquitted from the charges. 27. Further, the appellant is also paying Rs.10,000/- per month to the respondent-wife and son in the maintenance case through Bank Account transfer since 11.04.2017. 28. So far immovable property is concerned, submission has been made that he had 18 bighas of undivided landed property in the name of his great grandfather. And even if it is divided then only one and half bighas of land will come in the share of his father. Submission of the learned counsel for the respondent: 29. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-wife has submitted that due to compelling circumstances as the atrocities extended to her became intolerable she initiated criminal proceeding against the petitioner-appellant and her in-laws. 30. Learned counsel for the respondent, on instruction, has submitted that though the respondent-wife intends to reside with the appellant but the appellant does not want to keep her. 31. However, on the offer being made by learned counsel for the appellant for final settlement by way of permanent alimony, submission has been made that she has no source of income to survive with his growing 12 years child. 32. Further submission has been made that the appellant is working in the Indian Railway since 2012 and by this way even the provident fund and other savings are there for the appellant’s present necessity and also for his future necessity besides salary. But the life of the respondent and their son who is living with the respondent is at a very pitiable condition. 33. But the life of the respondent and their son who is living with the respondent is at a very pitiable condition. 33. Submission has been made that son is only 12 years old, as such she has to spend a large chunk of amount on the education of the son and his other necessity. 34. Learned counsel for the respondent has also drawn attention of the court towards salary slip of the appellant, wherein no allowance has been given for house since he is residing in the quarter allotted by railways whereas the respondent-wife has to spent huge amount on room rent who is living with his son. Therefore, the salary which has been reflected is without addition of the House Rent Amount and if it is added then it would reach to at least 60,000/-. 35. On the point of permanent alimony, submission has been made that the salary of the appellant would increase after every six months on increase of Dearness Allowance and every year on account of annual increment and further there will be huge amount of hike in salary due to forthcoming Pay-Commission(s) and promotion(s)/ACP/MACP and even after retirement the appellant-husband would get huge amount of retiral benefit as also the pension but the respondent-wife and their son, who is living with his mother, has to survive on the interest earned on the permanent alimony granted in favour of the respondent. Therefore, considering the life expectancy of 72 years and the fact that the respondent-wife is only 32 years of age, submission has been made that at least Rs. 4000000/- [forty lakhs] would require for survival of both the wife and son on the interest earned from that. 36. Therefore, submission has been made that considerable amount of maintenance be directed to be paid to the son as also the respondent-wife so that they can live in reasonable comfort considering the status and mode of life they would have used to live when they lived with appellant-husband. Analysis: 37. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the finding recorded by the learned Family Judge in the impugned judgment. 38. The fact, which is necessary to reiterate herein, is that the appellant-husband was married with the respondent on 05.12.2012 and a son was born on 20.11.2013 from their wedlock. Analysis: 37. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the finding recorded by the learned Family Judge in the impugned judgment. 38. The fact, which is necessary to reiterate herein, is that the appellant-husband was married with the respondent on 05.12.2012 and a son was born on 20.11.2013 from their wedlock. It is the case of the appellant that after some days the respondent shown her unwillingness to reside with him and ultimately, she left his house on 11.04.2017 and went to her parent's house and since then she is not living with him and living separately from him. 39. The appellant has alleged that though he and his parents made several attempts to bring his wife to his house and restore their conjugal rights but his wife on the contrary filed criminal cases against him for offence u/s 498(A) of I.P.C. bearing Complaint case No. 342/2017 and also filed a maintenance case u/s 125 of Cr.P.C. bearing Maintenance Case No. 77/2019. 40. On the contrary, the respondent-wife has alleged that due to torture meted out to her it is almost impossible to live with him and it is the appellant-husband who ousted her. 41. It is the specific case of the appellant-husband that since 11.04.2017 they are living separately and since then no physical relation has been made with his wife and all attempts were made in vain for restoration of their marital life, hence the appellant has filed the suit for dissolution of their marriage. 42. The learned family court, after appreciating the material available before it dismissed the suit. 43. Being aggrieved with the impugned order passed by the learned family court, the appellant-husband has preferred the present appeal. However, after appearance of the respondent-wife, the parties have agreed for permanent settlement and accordingly submission has been made in support thereof. 44. This Court in the aforesaid backdrop facts and submission requires to consider as to: “what would be the quantum of permanent alimony to meet the needs of son and the wife on the basis of pleadings available on record and as per the standard of life they would have enjoyed had they been living with the appellant? 45. 44. This Court in the aforesaid backdrop facts and submission requires to consider as to: “what would be the quantum of permanent alimony to meet the needs of son and the wife on the basis of pleadings available on record and as per the standard of life they would have enjoyed had they been living with the appellant? 45. This Court, before considering the aforesaid issue, needs to refer herein the provision of law as contained under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, wherein it has been provided that any court exercising jurisdiction under this Act may, at the time of passing any decree or 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 applicant 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, 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. For ready reference, Section 25 of the Act, 1955 is quoted as under: “ 25. Permanent alimony and maintenance .— (1) Any court exercising jurisdiction under this Act may, at the time of passing any decree or 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 applicant 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. (2) If the court is satisfied that there is a change in the circumstances of either party at any time after it has made an order under sub-section (1), it may, at the instance of either party, vary, modify or rescind any such order in such manner as the court may deem just. (3) If the court is satisfied that the party in whose favour an order has been made under this section has re-married or, if such party is the wife, that she has not remained chaste, or, if such party is the husband, that he has had sexual intercourse with any woman outside wedlock, 2 [it may at the instance of the other party vary, modify or rescind any such order in such manner as the court may deem just.” 46. It is evident from the aforesaid provision that concept of permanent alimony as provided under Section 25 have been enacted with the object of removing the hardship of the wife or the husband with no independent income sufficient for living or meeting litigant expenses; such a leave can be granted as well who may also be deprived of the same on proof of having sexual intercourse outside the wedlock. It is also settled position of law that the Court may grant permanent alimony to the party while disposing of the main application even if application has been moved; meaning thereby the intent of the Act is to remove the handicap/hardship of a wife of husband by passing an appropriate order at the appropriate stage either under Section 24 or 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The basic behind this is to sustain the live of husband or wife, if having no sufficient source of income. 47. The Hon’ble Apex Court has also considered the intent of Section 25 of Hindu Marriage Act in catena of Judgments wherein it has been observed that Section 25 of Act 1955 is an enabling provision. It empowers the court in a matrimonial case to consider facts and circumstances of the spouse applying and deciding whether or not to grant permanent alimony. Sub-section (1) of Section 25 provides that a matrimonial Court exercising the jurisdiction under the Hindu Marriage Act may at the time of passing a decree or at any time subsequent thereto on an Application made to it, order to pay maintenance. 48. Sub-section (1) of Section 25 provides that a matrimonial Court exercising the jurisdiction under the Hindu Marriage Act may at the time of passing a decree or at any time subsequent thereto on an Application made to it, order to pay maintenance. 48. Thus, a power is conferred on the Matrimonial Court to grant permanent alimony or maintenance on the basis of a decree of divorce passed under the Hindu Marriage Act even subsequent to the date of passing of the decree on the basis of an application made in that behalf. Sub-section (2) of Section 25 confers a power on the Court to vary, modify or rescind the order made under Sub-section (1) of Section 25 in case of change in circumstances. The power under Sub- section (3) of Section 25 is an independent power. The said power can be exercised if the Court is satisfied that the wife in whose favour an order under Subsection (1) of Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act is made has not remained chaste. In such event, at the instance of the other party, the Court may vary, modify or rescind the order under Sub-section (1) of Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act. 49. Reference in this regard may be made to the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Kalyan Dey Chowdhury v. Rita Dey Chowdhury Nee Nandy, (2017) 14 SCC 200 . For ready reference, paragraph 14 of the judgment is quoted as under: “14. Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 confers power upon the court to grant a permanent alimony to either spouse who claims the same by making an application. Sub-Section (2) of Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act confers ample power on the court to vary, modify or discharge any order for permanent alimony or permanent maintenance that may have been made in any proceeding under the Act under the provisions contained in sub-section (1) of Section 25. In exercising the power under Section 25(2), the court would have regard to the “change in the circumstances of the parties”. There must be some change in the circumstances of either party which may have to be taken into account when an application is made under sub-section (2) of Section 25 for variation, modification or rescission of the order as the court may deem just.” 50. There must be some change in the circumstances of either party which may have to be taken into account when an application is made under sub-section (2) of Section 25 for variation, modification or rescission of the order as the court may deem just.” 50. We may note here that an amendment has been brought to Sub-section (3) of Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act by the Act No. 68 of 1976 with effect from 27 th May 1996. Earlier, it was provided under Sub-section (3) of Section 25 that if the Court was satisfied that the party in whose favour an order has been made has not remained chaste, it shall rescind the order. The words “it shall rescind the order” appearing in Sub- section (3) of Section 25 were replaced by the said amendment by the words “it may at the instance of the other party vary, modify or rescind any such order …..”. The legislature in its wisdom by the said amendment has provided that after the facts stated in Sub-section (3) of Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act are established, the Court may vary, modify or rescind any such order under Sub-section (1) of Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Thus, after 1976, there is a discretion conferred on the Court by Sub-section (3) of Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act of declining to rescind, vary or modify the order under Sub-section (1) of Section 25 thereof, even if on an Application made by the husband, it is established that the wife has not remained chaste after the decree of maintenance is passed under Sub-section (1) of Section 25. 51. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Vinny Parmvir Parmar v. Parmvir Parmar, (2011) 13 SCC 112 while appreciating the core of Section 25 of the Act 1955 has observed that for permanent alimony and maintenance of either spouse, the respondent's own income and other property, and the income and other property of the applicant are all relevant material in addition to the conduct of the parties and other circumstances of the case, for ready reference the relevant paragraph of the aforesaid judgment is being quoted as under: 12. As per Section 25, while considering the claim for permanent alimony and maintenance of either spouse, the respondent's own income and other property, and the income and other property of the applicant are all relevant material in addition to the conduct of the parties and other circumstances of the case. It is further seen that the court considering such claim has to consider all the above relevant materials and determine the amount which is to be just for living standard. No fixed formula can be laid for fixing the amount of maintenance. It has to be in the nature of things which depend on various facts and circumstances of each case. The court has to consider the status of the parties, their respective needs, the capacity of the husband to pay, having regard to reasonable expenses for his own maintenance and others whom he is obliged to maintain under the law and statute. The courts also have 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 mode of life she was used to live 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. These are all the broad principles courts have to be kept (sic keep) in mind while determining maintenance or permanent alimony. 52. It needs to refer herein that no arithmetic formula can be adopted for grant of permanent alimony to wife. However, status of parties, their respective social needs, financial capacity of husband and other obligations must be taken into account. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of U. Sree v. U. Srinivas , (2013) 2 SCC 114 has observed that 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. For ready reference the relevant paragraph is being quoted as under: 33. We have reproduced the aforesaid orders to highlight that the husband had agreed to buy a flat at Hyderabad. It shall depend upon the status of the parties, their respective social needs, the financial capacity of the husband and other obligations. For ready reference the relevant paragraph is being quoted as under: 33. We have reproduced the aforesaid orders to highlight that the husband had agreed to buy a flat at Hyderabad. However, when the matter was listed thereafter, there was disagreement with regard to the locality of the flat arranged by the husband and, therefore, the matter was heard on merits. We have already opined that the husband has made out a case for divorce by proving mental cruelty. As a decree is passed, the wife is entitled to permanent alimony for her sustenance. 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 SCC 112 : (2012) 3 SCC (Civ) 290] (SCC p. 116, para 12) 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 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. 53. In the case of Rajnesh v. Neha & Anr (supra) the Hon’ble Apex Court has extensively dealt with the issue of granting interim/permanent alimony and has categorically held that the objective of granting interim/permanent alimony is to ensure that the dependent spouse is not reduced to destitution or vagrancy on account of the failure of the marriage, and not as a punishment to the other spouse. There is no straitjacket formula for fixing the quantum of maintenance to be awarded. There is no straitjacket formula for fixing the quantum of maintenance to be awarded. The Hon’ble Apex Court further held that the Court while considering the issue of maintenance, should consider the factors like the status of the parties; reasonable needs of the wife and dependent children; whether the applicant is educated and professionally qualified; whether the applicant has any independent source of income; whether the income is sufficient to enable her to maintain the same standard of living as she was accustomed to in her matrimonial home; whether the applicant was employed prior to her marriage; whether she was working during the subsistence of the marriage, for ready reference the relevant paragraph of the aforesaid judgment is being quoted as under: 77. The objective of granting interim/permanent alimony is to ensure that the dependent spouse is not reduced to destitution or vagrancy on account of the failure of the marriage, and not as a punishment to the other spouse. There is no straitjacket formula for fixing the quantum of maintenance to be awarded. 78. The factors which would weigh with the court inter alia are the status of the parties; reasonable needs of the wife and dependent children; whether the applicant is educated and professionally qualified; whether the applicant has any independent source of income; whether the income is sufficient to enable her to maintain the same standard of living as she was accustomed to in her matrimonial home; whether the applicant was employed prior to her marriage; whether she was working during the subsistence of the marriage; whether the wife was required to sacrifice her employment opportunities for nurturing the family, child rearing, and looking after adult members of the family; reasonable costs of litigation for a non- working wife. [Refer to Jasbir Kaur Sehgal v. District Judge, Dehradun, (1997) 7 SCC 7 ; Refer to Vinny Parmvir Parmar v. Parmvir Parmar, (2011) 13 SCC 112 : (2012) 3 SCC (Civ) 290] 79. In Manish Jain v. Akanksha Jain [Manish Jain v. Akanksha Jain, (2017) 15 SCC 801 : (2018) 2 SCC (Civ) 712] this Court held that the financial position of the parents of the applicant wife, would not be material while determining the quantum of maintenance. An order of interim maintenance is conditional on the circumstance that the wife or husband who makes a claim has no independent income, sufficient for her or his support. An order of interim maintenance is conditional on the circumstance that the wife or husband who makes a claim has no independent income, sufficient for her or his support. It is no answer to a claim of maintenance that the wife is educated and could support herself. The court must take into consideration the status of the parties and the capacity of the spouse to pay for her or his support. Maintenance is dependent upon factual situations; the court should mould the claim for maintenance based on various factors brought before it. 80. On the other hand, the financial capacity of the husband, his actual income, reasonable expenses for his own maintenance, and dependent family members whom he is obliged to maintain under the law, liabilities if any, would be required to be taken into consideration, to arrive at the appropriate quantum of maintenance to be paid. The court must have due regard to the standard of living of the husband, as well as the spiralling inflation rates and high costs of living. The plea of the husband that he does not possess any source of income ipso facto does not absolve him of his moral duty to maintain his wife if he is able-bodied and has educational qualifications. [ReemaSalkan v. Sumer Singh Salkan, (2019) 12 SCC 303 : (2018) 5 SCC (Civ) 596 : (2019) 4 SCC (Cri) 339] 81. A careful and just balance must be drawn between all relevant factors. The test for determination of maintenance in matrimonial disputes depends on the financial status of the respondent, and the standard of living that the applicant was accustomed to in her matrimonial home. [Chaturbhuj v. Sita Bai, (2008) 2 SCC 316 : (2008) 1 SCC (Civ) 547 : (2008) 1 SCC (Cri) 356] The maintenance amount awarded must be reasonable and realistic, and avoid either of the two extremes i.e. maintenance awarded to the wife should neither be so extravagant which becomes oppressive and unbearable for the respondent, nor should it be so meagre that it drives the wife to penury. The sufficiency of the quantum has to be adjudged so that the wife is able to maintain herself with reasonable comfort. 54. Recently, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Rakhi Sadhukhan Vs. Raja Sadhukhan, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1259 has enhanced the amount of alimony subject to increase of alimony on every two years. 55. The sufficiency of the quantum has to be adjudged so that the wife is able to maintain herself with reasonable comfort. 54. Recently, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Rakhi Sadhukhan Vs. Raja Sadhukhan, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1259 has enhanced the amount of alimony subject to increase of alimony on every two years. 55. This Court has considered the factual aspect of the said case and on perusal of the fact, referred therein, it is evident that the appellant-wife and respondent-husband were married on 18.06.1997. A son was born to them on 05.08.1998. In July 2008, the respondent-husband filed Matrimonial Suit No. 430 of 2008 under Section 27 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 seeking dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty allegedly inflicted by the appellant- wife. Subsequently, the appellant-wife filed Misc. Case No. 155 of 2008 in the same suit under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking interim maintenance for herself and the minor son. The Trial Court, by order dated 14.01.2010, awarded interim maintenance of Rs. 8,000/- per month to the appellant-wife and Rs. 10,000/- towards litigation expenses. The appellant-wife then instituted Misc. Case No. 116 of 2010 under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. The Trial Court, vide order dated 28.03.2014, directed the respondent-husband to pay maintenance of Rs. 8,000/- per month to the appellant-wife and Rs. 6,000/- per month to the minor son, along with Rs. 5,000/- towards litigation costs. The Trial Court, vide order dated 10.01.2016, dismissed the matrimonial suit, finding that the respondent-husband had failed to prove cruelty. Aggrieved, the respondent filed FAT No. 122 of 2015 before the High Court of Calcutta. During the pendency of the appeal, the appellant-wife filed CAN No. 4505 of 2025 seeking interim maintenance of Rs. 30,000/- for herself and Rs. 20,000/- for the son, along with Rs. 50,000/- towards litigation expenses. The High Court, by order dated 14.05.2015, directed the respondent-husband to pay interim maintenance of Rs. 15,000/- per month. Subsequently, by order dated 14.07.2016, the High Court noted that the respondent-husband was drawing a net monthly salary of Rs. 69,000/- and enhanced the interim maintenance to Rs. 20,000/- per month. 50,000/- towards litigation expenses. The High Court, by order dated 14.05.2015, directed the respondent-husband to pay interim maintenance of Rs. 15,000/- per month. Subsequently, by order dated 14.07.2016, the High Court noted that the respondent-husband was drawing a net monthly salary of Rs. 69,000/- and enhanced the interim maintenance to Rs. 20,000/- per month. Finally, the High Court, by the impugned order dated 25.06.2019, allowed the respondent's appeal, granted a decree of divorce on the ground of mental cruelty and irretrievable breakdown of marriage, and directed the respondent-husband to redeem the mortgage on the flat where the appellant-wife was residing and transfer the title deed to her name by 31.08.2019; allow the appellant-wife and their son to continue residing in the said flat; and continue to pay permanent alimony of Rs. 20,000/- per month to the appellant-wife, subject to a 5% increase every three years. Additionally, the High Court directed payment of educational expenses for the son's university education and Rs. 5,000/- per month for private tuition. 56. Aggrieved by the quantum of alimony awarded, the appellant-wife is approached the Hon’ble Apex Court. 57. The Hon’ble Apex Court, by interim order dated 07.11.2023, noting the absence of representation on behalf of the respondent-husband despite proof of service, enhanced the monthly maintenance to Rs. 75,000/- with effect from 01.11.2023. The respondent-husband subsequently entered appearance and filed an application seeking vacation of the said interim order. 58. The appellant-wife contends that the amount of Rs. 20,000/- per month, which the High Court made final, was originally awarded as interim maintenance. She submits that the respondent-husband has a monthly income of approximately Rs. 4,00,000/- and the quantum of alimony awarded is not commensurate with the standard of living maintained by the parties during the marriage. 59. In response, the respondent-husband submits that his current net monthly income is Rs. 1,64,039/-, earned from his employment at the Institute of Hotel Management, Taratala, Kolkata. He has placed on record salary slips, bank statements, and income tax returns for the year 2023-2024. It is further stated that he was earlier employed with the Taj Hotel, drawing a gross annual salary of Rs. 21,92,525/-. He also submits that his monthly household expenses total Rs. 1,72,088/-, and that he has remarried, has a dependent family, and aged parents. The respondent-husband contends that their son, now 26 years of age, is no longer financially dependent. 60. 21,92,525/-. He also submits that his monthly household expenses total Rs. 1,72,088/-, and that he has remarried, has a dependent family, and aged parents. The respondent-husband contends that their son, now 26 years of age, is no longer financially dependent. 60. The Hon’ble Apex Court taking note of the quantum of permanent alimony fixed by the High Court has come to the conclusion that it requires revision. The said revision is on the basis of the respondent-husband's income, financial disclosures, and past earnings which establish that he is in a position to pay a higher amount. The Hon’ble Apex Court has observed that the appellant-wife, who has remained unmarried and is living independently, is entitled to a level of maintenance that is reflective of the standard of living she enjoyed during the marriage and which reasonably secures her future. It has also been observed, the inflationary cost of living and her continued reliance on maintenance as the sole means of financial support necessitate a reassessment of the amount. 61. Therefore, Hon’ble Apex Court has held that, a sum of Rs. 50,000/- per month would be just, fair and reasonable to ensure financial stability for the appellant-wife. The said amount shall be subject to an enhancement of 5% every two years. As regards the son, now aged 26, the Hon’ble Apex Court has expressed its view that the Court is not inclined to direct any further mandatory financial support. However, it is open to the respondent-husband to voluntarily assist him with educational or other reasonable expenses. It has been clarified that that the son's right to inheritance remains unaffected, and any claim to ancestral or other property may be pursued in accordance with law. 62. Accordingly, the appeal was allowed and the order of the High Court was modified to the extent that the permanent alimony payable to the appellant-wife shall be Rs. 50,000/- per month, subject to a 5% increase every two years, for ready reference the relevant paragraph of the said order is being quoted as under: “7. Having considered the submissions and materials on record, we are of the view that the quantum of permanent alimony fixed by the High Court requires revision. The respondent-husband's income, financial disclosures, and past earnings establish that he is in a position to pay a higher amount. Having considered the submissions and materials on record, we are of the view that the quantum of permanent alimony fixed by the High Court requires revision. The respondent-husband's income, financial disclosures, and past earnings establish that he is in a position to pay a higher amount. The appellant-wife, who has remained unmarried and is living independently, is entitled to a level of maintenance that is reflective of the standard of living she enjoyed during the marriage and which reasonably secures her future. Furthermore, the inflationary cost of living and her continued reliance on maintenance as the sole means of financial support necessitate a reassessment of the amount. 8. In our considered opinion, a sum of Rs. 50,000/- per month would be just, fair and reasonable to ensure financial stability for the appellant-wife. This amount shall be subject to an enhancement of 5% every two years. As regards the son, now aged 26, we are not inclined to direct any further mandatory financial support. However, it is open to the respondent-husband to voluntarily assist him with educational or other reasonable expenses. We clarify that the son's right to inheritance remains unaffected, and any claim to ancestral or other property may be pursued in accordance with law. 9. In view of the above, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order of the High Court is modified to the extent that the permanent alimony payable to the appellant-wife shall be Rs. 50,000/- per month, subject to a 5% increase every two years, as noted above.” 63. In the instant case herein, in terms of the judgment rendered by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Rajnesh v. Neha & Anr. (supra), the affidavit has been filed on behalf of the appellant-husband annexing therewith the details of salary, bank statement showing the details of salary and other perks, annexing therewith the salary slip and bank statement as also the details of movable and immovable property. 64. We have perused the affidavit filed by the appellant-husband wherefrom it is evident that the appellant is working in the Indian Railway since 2012, as reflected from the salary slip and is presently working at Chittaranjan Locomotive Works, Chittaranjan. From the salary slip of January, 2025, it is evident that his gross salary Rs. 53,240/-, which does not include House Rent Allowance [HRA] and definitely, if it would include HRA, the figure of gross salary would increase. From the salary slip of January, 2025, it is evident that his gross salary Rs. 53,240/-, which does not include House Rent Allowance [HRA] and definitely, if it would include HRA, the figure of gross salary would increase. It suggests that he is living in government accommodation with all amenities. Further, there is no reflection of the amount of provident fund which accrued in his PF Account. The appellant has also not shown his other savings though allegedly since long he is living without his wife and son. However, on regular basis as per the direction passed by the Court, he is paying Rs. 10,000/- for the survival of his wife and son. 65. Submission has been made on behalf of respondent-wife that the salary of the appellant increases after every six months on increase of Dearness Allowance and every year on account of annual increment and further there will be huge amount of hike in salary due to forthcoming Pay- Commissions and promotions/ACP/MACP and even after retirement the appellant-husband would get huge amount of retiral benefit as also the pension but the respondent-wife and their son, who is living with his mother, has to survive on the interest earned on the permanent alimony granted in favour of the respondent. 66. Further submission has been made that considering the life expectancy of 72 years and the fact that the respondent-wife is only 32 years of age; and further there would incur huge amount on the education/medical etc. of son who is only 12 years of age and further taking into consideration the future inflation etc., though a huge amount would require but at least Rs. 4000000/- [forty lakhs] would require for survival of both the wife and son on the interest earned from that. 67. Learned counsel for the respondent has further submitted that even taking the ratio laid down in the case of Rakhi Sadhukhan Vs. Raja Sadhukhan (supra) at least Rs.20,000/- for wife and Rs. 10,000/- is required for survival and education and medical etc. for son and for which if she deposits the amounts so given by the appellant then it would even fetch the amount of Rs. 30,000/- per month. 68. Raja Sadhukhan (supra) at least Rs.20,000/- for wife and Rs. 10,000/- is required for survival and education and medical etc. for son and for which if she deposits the amounts so given by the appellant then it would even fetch the amount of Rs. 30,000/- per month. 68. This Court, considering the submissions advanced on behalf of parties and law laid by Hon’ble Apex Court as referred hereinabove, has again perused the affidavit filed by the appellant-husband and found therefrom that his gross salary is Rs. 53240/- per month, which included basis pay of Rs. 27600/-; Dearness Allowance of Rs. 14628/-; Transport Allowance of Rs. 2754/-; and incentive of 8258/-. It further appears that the salary slip does not reflect House Rent Allowance meaning thereby the appellant is residing in the government accommodation with all good facilities. Whereas for the respondent-wife and the son has to live on rented house or else. 69. Further, the appellant is only about 36 years old, taking his date of birth to be 07.02.1988, as reflected in the pay-slip and he would be in service for long 24 years of service from now and after retirement a huge amount on account of gratuity; provident fund etc., he would get and even in- service he would be availing all the facilities as available for employees of Indian Railway. 70. Whereas on the other hand, the respondent-wife has to survive for his livelihood as also take care of upbringing and better education of the son born out of their wedlock solely on the amount of permanent alimony so given by the appellant-husband. At present, the respondent-wife is only 32 years and taking into life expectancy of even 72 years, she has to survive for long 40 years on the amount of permanent alimony given by her husband beating the inflation etc. along with his son, who is 12 years old. 71. As per submission advanced by learned counsel for the respondent-wife, even taking life expectancy and multiplied by the 1/3 of the salary it comes to more than 80 lakhs but taking into account the present capacity of the appellant, she only expects Rs.40 lakhs as alimony for survival of herself and the son born out of their wedlock. 72. 71. As per submission advanced by learned counsel for the respondent-wife, even taking life expectancy and multiplied by the 1/3 of the salary it comes to more than 80 lakhs but taking into account the present capacity of the appellant, she only expects Rs.40 lakhs as alimony for survival of herself and the son born out of their wedlock. 72. This Court is conscious that the appellant-husband is also to survive and he has other liability and responsibility but vis-à-vis it is also his utmost duty to maintain the standard of life of the respondent-wife and his son, they would have enjoyed during subsistence of the marriage as per income and status of his husband/father, the appellant herein. 73. For the reasons aforesaid, this Court thought it proper that a sum of Rs. 3500000/- [thirty five lakhs] in total as one time permanent alimony would be just, fair and reasonable, for sustenance of the respondent-wife, who has no other source of income than the alimony so received by the appellant-husband and the son born out of their wedlock for his livelihood, sustenance and study. 74. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant-husband had made payment of Rs.5,00,000/-to the respondent-wife on direction of this Court, when this Hon'ble Court granting anticipatory bail to the appellant in A.B.A. No. 5469/2018 in a case filed by the respondent for offence u/s 498(A) of Indian Penal Code, subject to adjustment towards the amount of full and final settlement of the parties. Further, the appellant is also paying Rs. 10,000/- per month to the respondent in the maintenance case through Bank Account transfer without any relationship since 11.04.2017. 75. We have gone through order granting anticipatory bail in A.B.A. No. 5496 of 2018 and found therefrom that the anticipatory bail was granted with the condition of payment of Rs. 5 lakhs in favour of respondent-wife, which the appellant had paid and it has also been admitted by the respondent-wife. 76. In such view of the matter, the appellant-husband is directed to pay a sum of Rs. 30 lakhs [thirty lakhs], which shall be paid by him in three equal installments within a period of 12 months from the date of passing of the order and first installment shall be paid within a period of one month from today. 76. In such view of the matter, the appellant-husband is directed to pay a sum of Rs. 30 lakhs [thirty lakhs], which shall be paid by him in three equal installments within a period of 12 months from the date of passing of the order and first installment shall be paid within a period of one month from today. It is made clear that out of the 30 lakhs, the appellant is directed to do fix deposit of Rs. 10 lakhs in the nationalized bank in name of his son for his education etc. 77. It is made clear that the son’s right to inheritance remains unaffected, and any claim to ancestral or other property may be pursued in accordance with law. 78. This Court, considering the factual aspect involved in the case and particularly the fact that due to financial crunch the survival of the respondent-wife and son as also the study of the child may not get disturbed, grants liberty to the respondent-wife that if the amount is not credited to her account, as per the direction passed by this Court, the respondent-wife will be at liberty to approach the court of law in accordance with law. 79. This Court, however, hope and trust that the appellant-husband will not invite such situation and will abide by the direction so passed by this Court for permanent alimony in favour of respondent-wife and the son. 80. Accordingly, the impugned order/judgment dated 22nd August, 2024 and decree signed on 6 th September, 2024 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Deoghar in Original Suit No. 217 of 2023 is hereby quashed and set aside, subject to the final payment of alimony, as directed by this Court. 81. With the aforesaid the directions and observations, as made hereinabove, the instant appeal stands disposed and decreed in the above terms. 82. Pending Interlocutory Application, if any, stands disposed of.