Point of Law: Family Courts are passing orders under Section 25 of Hindu Marriage Act while finally deciding matrimonial disputes more or less in mechanical manner without making proper inquiry - This does not serve end of justice - Passing any order of lump sum maintenance without disclosing basis on which Court has arrived at sum, is bound to be unjust and unfair to parties - Upon inquiry, applicant may be entitled to more amount that what has actually been awarded as permanent alimony and yet, in another case, awarding an amount to which applicant is not entitled under law but has been awarded far more than what is intended to be provided under law, other party would suffer injustice, burden with more than what is intended to be fastened under law towards payment of permanent alimony - All Family Courts while finally disposing of matrimonial dispute and considering prayer for grant of permanent alimony under Section 25 of Hindu Marriage Act are obligated under law to collect necessary evidence to enable them to reach to a just and fair conclusion as to the amount payable to party applying for permanent alimony.

ORDER :

Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, J.

1. Considering the nature of dispute raised before us and the order required to be passed which will essentially result in remand of the case, we are inclined to dispose off the matter finally.

2. Appellant/wife filed an application for grant of decree of divorce against respondent/husband on the ground of cruelty. She also made prayer under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act that as she resides separately from husband since 2017, she has no other source of income and she mostly keeps ill and requires some means for her treatment, husband being a person of good financial capacity and possessed of ten acres of agricultural land from which he is earning, she may be awarded Rs. 10 lakhs as permanent alimony.

Prayer under Section 27 of the Hindu Marriage Act was also made for return of Streedhan, as per the schedule appended thereto and listing the articles of gifts at the time of marriage.

3. In the proceeding before the Court below, though respondent/husband was served, he did not appear and was therefore proceeded ex-parte.

4. After collecting the evidence led by the appellant/wife, the learned Family Court returned finding that the appellant/wife succeeded in proving that she was subjected to cruelty and therefore on this ground she was entitled to grant of decree of divorce.

5. However, as far as her claim under Section 27 of the Hindu Marriage Act was concerned, the same was rejected and the learned trial Court did not find any material evidence led by the wife in support of her application, not even the receipts of said purchase of the items enlisted with the application.

6. As far as application under Section 25 for grant of permanent alimony is concerned, that prayer was already rejected by the learned Family Court without any inquiry on the ground that the appellant/wife was being awarded maintenance under Section 125 proceedings and therefore, there was no need to pass any order for grant of permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

7. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree to the extent appellant applications under Section 25 and 27 of the Hindu Marriage Act has been rejected, this appeal has been filed.

8. Learned counsel for the appellant would argue that the appellant led oral evidence in support of her pleading with regard to the Streedhan/gift articles enlisted along with the application which were gifted to the appellant/wife at the time of marriage, but even then the learned trial Court below has rejected the same, though, evidence in this regard has remained uncontroverted. It is next submitted that the application for grant of permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, ought to be duly inquired into but the Court below refused to consider the same, swayed by grant of maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C., which was an outcome of summary proceeding, whereas the remedy for maintenance under Section 25 is of permanent nature granted upon full fledged trial, upon the adjudication of the rights of the parties. At the most, the Court below could have adjusted the amount of maintenance awarded under Section 125 Cr.P.C. proceedings. He, therefore, has prayed for grant of appropriate relief both with regard to return of the Streedhan as also permanent alimony.

9. We have heard counsel for the appellant and perused the records.

10. On factual score it remains undisputed that the appellant/wife, even before decision of application under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, had earlier approached the Magistrate by instituting application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and in those proceedings she was initially awarded maintenance of Rs.1800/- per month vide order dated 10.07.2017, which was later on modified enhancing the amount of maintenance from Rs.1800/- to Rs.2000/-. The occasion arose for the Family Court to decide application for grant of permanent alimony while passing the decree of divorce on 10.05.2019 i.e. much after passing of the order of maintenan