The court upheld the principles of timely intervention in maintenance proceedings and clarified obligations for alimony determination in divorce, emphasizing the necessity of financial support to avoid destitution.

Judgment :

S.S. Mishra, J.

1. The appellant–husband has filed Civil Proceeding No. 761 of 2013 before the learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty and harassment allegedly meted out by the respondent-wife. However, by judgment dated 19.11.2019, the learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack dismissed the said Civil Proceeding.

2. Being aggrieved by the said judgment, the appellant has preferred an appeal by filing Matrimonial Appeal No. 162 of 2019 before this Court. The coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 28.06.2022, while setting aside the judgment dated 19.11.2019, remanded the civil proceeding to the learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack for fresh adjudication. For convenience of ready reference, the relevant part of the said order dated 28.06.2022 is reproduced hereunder:-

“5. Apart that, by a special application filed by the Respondent, some additional materials have been placed on records to show the financial strength of the Appellant. It has been asserted that riches have come to the Appellant after death of his mother who was a Government employee. Counsel for the parties have urged in unison that the matrimonial suit should be remanded to the court of the Judge, Family Court, Cuttack. In the face of this submission, we are of the view that since the parties are in the half-way mark towards resolution and they have been stuck as alimony could be settled, by way of remand, let the process continue. To draw an abrupt end, would not support any purpose.

6. Accordingly, this suit is remanded with the following observations:-

i) The judge, Family Court. Cuttack shall allow the parties to bring the additional evidence, confined to the financial strength of the Appellant and after such evidence, if any, is recorded the Judge, Family Court shall determine the permanent alimony if the parties continue to the approach as adopted before this court, unless the parties by that time mutually decide the quantum of alimony. There shall not be any inhibition to accept such quantum by the Judge, Family Court.

ii) If the quantum of alimony is so decided by the parties, the consent terms be recorded and depending thereupon, the marriage may be dissolved by a decree of divorce.

7. It is made absolutely clear that if the memorandum of consent terms are not filed in the manner as noted above, the exercise of quantifying the alimony may be treated as redundant. In that case, the impugned judgment shall be deemed as restored. No elaborate judgment in the event will be required to be drawn. For the purpose of remand, we interfere with the said judgment. It is accordingly, set aside.

8. In the result this appeal is partly allowed.

9. Draw the decree accordingly.

10. Having regard to the nature of the dispute, the Judge, Family Court, Cuttack is requested to take all possible efforts to complete the said civil proceeding, on remand, within a period of six months from the date when a copy of the order will be received by him.”

While remanding the matter, this Court specifically directed the learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack to afford opportunity to the parties to file additional affidavits confined to the financial capacity of the appellant and, pursuant whereof, to determine the quantum of permanent alimony. This Court further observed that, upon such determination if the parties so agreed, the consent terms could be recorded and depending thereupon, the marriage could be dissolved by a decree of divorce.

3. However, after remand, the learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack failed to determine the quantum of permanent alimon