ARINDAM SINHA, M. S. SAHOO
Iti Satpathy @ Kar – Appellant
Versus
Sarada Prasad Kar – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Arindam Sinha, J.
Mrs. Patnaik, learned advocate appears on behalf of appellant-wife and submits, her client has preferred appeal from judgment dated 28th November, 2017 made by the family Court dissolving the marriage and directing permanent alimony at ₹7,50,000/-. Respondent-husband has also preferred appeal (MATA no.43 of 2018) against quantum of permanent alimony directed by the judgment. Mr. Sahoo, learned advocate appears on behalf of the husband.
2. Mrs. Patnaik submits, there was lack of cogent evidence to prove either cruelty or unsoundness of mind of incurable nature. None of the two grounds were proved before the family Court. The learned Judge failed to appreciate and thereby erred in dissolving the marriage.
3. She draws attention to deposition dated 26th August, 2015 of respondent-husband in cross-examination. We reproduced below a passage from paragraph 2 therein.
"I returned to my house from Kolkata to my native village 15 days after I had gone there after taking leave from my service place. After marriage till I went to Kolkata I along with the O.P were living peacefully by cooperating to each other. During the period of my stay at Kolkata, I was informed by
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.