##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION

APPELLATE SIDE

BEFORE:

The Hon’ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya

CO 4537 of 2023

Saikat Mitra

Versus

Amrita Dutta

With

CO 1168 of 2024

Amrita Dutta

Versus

Saikat Mitra

Mr. Debdutta Raha

Mr. Avishek Bhandari

Mr. Rupam Gupta

Mr. Dipayan Dan

Mr. Avishek Bhandari

Mr. Dipayan Dan

…for the petitioner in CO 4537/2023

for opposite party in CO 1168/2024

Mr. Partha Pratim Roy

Mr. Shibaji Kr. Das

Mr. Ahshan Ahmed

Ms. Deblina De

…for the petitioner in CO 1168/2024

for opposite party in CO 4537/2023

Heard on: 20.05.2026

Judgement delivered

In open Court on: 20^rd May, 2026.

The Court:-

1. The order dated September 19, 2023 passed by the learned Additional District Judge,

Fast Track Court No. V at Barasat in Misc. Case No. 73 of 2021 arising out of

2

Matrimonial Suit No. 1727 of 2020, is under challenge at the instance of the husband

and wife. The civil revisioanl application filed by the husband is registered as CO

4537 of 2023 and that filed by the wife is registered as CO 1168 of 2024.

2. By the order impugned, the learned Additional District Judge allowed the

Misc. Case No. 73 of 2021 thereby directing the husband to pay alimony to the wife at

the rate of Rs.10,000/- per month for herself and Rs.8,000/- per month for the minor

daughter with effect from the date of filing of the application together with one time

litigation cost of Rs.15,000/-.

3. The learned Advocate appearing for the husband submits that the wife is

having sufficient income of her own to maintain herself as well as the minor daughter.

He submits that the learned Trial Judge ought not to have granted any amount on

account of alimony for the wife.

4. Mr. Roy, learned Advocate appearing for the wife submits that the income

of the husband is much more than that of the income of the wife. He thus, submits that

the wife is entitled to some more amounts to compensate such difference in the income

between the husband and the wife in view of the well-settled proposition of law that

the wife shall have to be maintained in the same status as that of the husband. He

further submits that the learned Trial Judge, without considering the actual income of

the husband has, fixed the amount of alimony for the wife and the minor daughter at a

much lower rate than what the wife is entitled to. Mr. Roy further submits that in the

meantime the income of the husband has also increased considerably and, therefore,

the amount of alimony should be increased taking note of the subsequent increase for

the salary of the husband.

5. In reply, the learned Advocate for the husband submits that the income of

the wife has also increased in the meantime. He submits that since the wife is earning a

3

substantial amount on account of salary, the wife is not entitled to any alimony for

herself.

6. Heard the learned Advocates for the respective parties and perused the

materials placed.

7. The application under Section 36 of the Special Marriage Act was filed and

registered as a miscellaneous case. It is not in dispute that the affidavits of assets and

liabilities were filed by the respective parties to support their respective contentions in

the Misc. Case.

8. The impugned order was passed sometime in the month of September, 2023

taking note of the income of the respective parties and expenses of the respective

parties as well as the minor daughter as per the available materials that were available

on record. It is not in dispute that in the meantime the income of the parties as well as

the expenses for the minor daughter have increased.

9. A party seeking enhancement of alimony is also free to approach the Court

for such purpose. Though it is well-settled that while deciding an application under

Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the Court should restrict itself to the materials

that were available on record before the learned Trial Judge at the time when the order

under challenge was passed, however, considering the fact that the matter relates to

alimony and the suit is at the stag