Permanent alimony is determined based on the husband's financial capacity and the wife's claim of insufficient income; distinction between stree dhan and dowry must be carefully assessed.

ORDER :

Anuradha Shukla, J.

Both these first appeals arise out of a common judgment and decree passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Sagar on 23.11.2021 deciding two matrimonial cases RCSHM No.54/2002 and RCSHM No.133/1996. Parties are common in both these first appeals and appellant is assailing both of them only in limited aspects of judgment and decree which relate to awarding Rs.30 Lacs as permanent alimony to respondent wife and on the direction of paying Rs.4 Lacs to her as market value of her stree dhan.

2. Admitted facts relevant for the decision of these first appeals are that a divorce petition under RCSHM No.54/2002 was filed by appellant (hereinafter referred to as 'husband') on the grounds of cruelty and desertion in the year 1995. In another matrimonial case filed as RCSHM No.133/1996 respondent (hereinafter referred to as 'wife') filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights. Under the impugned judgment, petition for restitution of conjugal rights filed by wife was dismissed and the divorce petition filed by the respondent was allowed with supplemental reliefs in favour of wife regarding payment of permanent alimony and market value of her "stree dhan". It may also be mentioned here that two separate first appeals were filed by wife registered as First Appeal Nos.4/2022 and 5/2022 assailing the divorce decree and quantum of market value of "stree dhan", but both these appeals stand dismissed vide order dated 13.08.2025.

3. Factual aspects of the case are that parties were married on 08.07.1989 and lived together at Satna, Gaziabad, Chhatarpur and Raipur, but their relationship grew sour in the year 1990 itself. Admittedly, parties were blessed with twins, a baby boy and a baby girl, in September, 1990, but things did not improve even thereafter. In March 1996 husband filed a divorce petition, and thereafter in same year a report was lodged by wife under Section 498-A of IPC . Besides other legal cases instituted between them, an application under Section 9 of HINDU MARRIAGE ACT too was filed bywife in the year 1996. Since dismissal of application under Section 9 of HINDU MARRIAGE ACT and grant of divorce decree in favour of husband are not under challenge in present appeals, therefore, we do not find it useful to go any deeper into those facts which have driven the parties to this miserable state of relationship. The limited question involved here requires analysis on "whether the family Court was justified in allowing payment of permanent alimony to the tune of Rs.30 Lacs and also market value of "stree dhan" assessing it at Rs.4 Lacs".

4. From paragraph No.23 of impugned judgment it is reflected that an application under Section 125 of HINDU MARRIAGE ACT was filed by wife requesting payment of 1/3rd part of the salary of husband as permanent alimony but it was opposed by husband claiming that wife having earning, is competent to maintain herself and therefore, she does not deserve any permanent alimony. The trial Court considered rival arguments in paragraph No.197 onwards of the impugned judgment under issue No.4. It was of the opinion that though wife was claiming monthly maintenance amount, but her intention is to obtain a relief that operates even after the disposal of main petition and therefore, her request falls within the ambit of permanent alimony, though in the form of monthly maintenance. The family Court considered income tax return of husband for the year 2016-2017 and appreciating the ove