Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(GAU) 329
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY, MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN, JJ
KULEN DAS – Appellant
Versus
SANGITA JOSHI – Respondent
Mat.App. / 18 / 2024
MR. A K BHUYAN, MS. S CHAKRAVARTY
The court upheld the decree of divorce based on established grounds of cruelty and mandated permanent alimony for the respondent.
Headnote:(A) Family Courts Act, 1984 - Section 19 - Special Marriage Act, 1954 - Section 27 - Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - Section 13(1)(ia) - Appeal against decree of divorce - The marriage between the parties was dissolved by the Family Court, which granted a decree of divorce to the respondent-wife, who sought the divorce on grounds of cruelty. The appellant was directed to pay Rs. 6,50,000/- as permanent alimony in three equal installments. (Paras 2, 3)
(B) Divorce - Grounds - The respondent sought divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, indicating that the marriage had irretrievably broken down due to cruelty. (Para 2)
Facts of the case:
The appeal arises from a decree of divorce granted by the Family Court on 23.05.2023, where the marriage solemnized on 11.03.2012 was dissolved after the respondent claimed cruelty. The Family Court ordered the appellant to pay alimony.
Findings of Court:
The Family Court's decision to grant a divorce based on the established grounds of cruelty was upheld, and the alimony amount was deemed reasonable.
Issues: The main issues addressed were the grounds for divorce and the adequacy of the alimony awarded.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reaffirmed that the grounds for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act were sufficiently established, justifying the Family Court's decree. The alimony was ordered to ensure the respondent's financial security post-divorce.
Result: Appeal admitted for hearing.
learned counsel for the appellant and Ms. S. Chakravarty, learned counsel for the sole respondent.
2. This is an appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act , 1984 preferred against the GAHC010242122023 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Mat.App./18/2024 KULEN DAS S/O LATE JATINDRA NATH DAS RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO. 73, 2ND FOOR, KARNACHAL ROAD, SILPUKHURI, PS CHANDMARI, KAMRUP M ASSAM 781003 VERSUS SANGITA JOSHI D/O NARAYAN JOSHI, RESIDENT OF GOSWAMI BHAWAN, ARUNACHAL PATH, ZOO ROAD TINAILI, GUWAHATI 781021, DIST KAMRUP M ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A K BHUYAN Advocate for the Respondent : MS. S CHAKRAVARTY BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER Date : 12.06.2024 [Manish Choudhury, J.] Heard Ms. N. Choudhury, learned counsel for the appellant and Ms. S. Chakravarty, learned counsel for the sole respondent.
2. This is an appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act , 1984 preferred against the Judgment and Order dated 23.05.2023 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court no. II, Kamrup [Metro] at Guwahati in F.C. [Civil] Case no. 492/2020 [‘the Family Court’, for short], whereby, the marriage solemnized between the appellant and the respondent on 11.03.2012 has been dissolved by a decree of divorce on contest. Before the learned Family Court, the respondent-wife as the petitioner, preferred the application under Section 27 of the Special Marriage Act , 1954 read with Section 13[1][ia] of the Hindu Marriage Act , 1955, seeking a decree of divorce.
3. The appellant is directed to pay a sum of Rs. 6,50,000/- as permanent alimony to the respondent within a period of 3 months from the date of Judgment and Order in 3 [three] equal installments.
4. The appeal is admitted for hearing. 5. The records of F.C. [Civil] Case no. 492/2020 be called for. 6. Issue notice, returnable in 4 [four] weeks. 7. As Ms. Chakravarty, learned counsel has entered appearance accepted notice on behalf of the sole respondent, issuance of formal notice stands dispensed with. However, Ms. Choudhury, learned counsel for the appellant shall furnish a copy of the memorandum along with the annexures to Ms.
Chakravarty within 3 [three] working days from today.
8. The respondent may file its pleadings, if so advised, on or before the returnable date.
