IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI F.A. No.141 of 2023 .

…Appellant/Petitioner Versus … …Respondent/Respondent -------

CORAM: HON’BLEMR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR -------

For theAppellant : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Gupta, Adv.

For the Respondent : Mr. Pradeep Kumar Deomani, Adv.

----------------------------

CAV/Reserved on 12.06.2025 Pronounced on 19/06/2025 Per Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.

Prayer:

1. The instant appeal under Section 19(1) of the Family Court Act, 1984 is directed against part of order/judgment dated 31.03.2023 and decree dated 12.04.2023 passed by the learned Additional Principal Judge-II, Ranchi Cum Additional Family Court, Ranchi in Original Suit No. 449 of 2016, whereby and whereunder the learned Additional Principal Judge while allowing the suit which has been preferred for dissolution of marriage, has directed the respondent-husband to pay permanent alimony to the tune of Rs. 12 lacs to the appellant-wife and if any amount already paid to the appellant-wife that was directed to be adjusted from the amount of permanent alimony so awarded. It has further been held that this order of permanent alimony will not affect the order regarding payment of Rs. 8000/- per month to the son namely .

Brief facts of the case

2. The brief facts of the case, as per the pleading made in the original suit, needs to be referred herein reads, which reads as under:

3. The petitioner-appellant married with respondent on

15.07.2010 according to Hindu rites and customs in presence of family members, relatives, friends of both the parties Ranchi and thereafter, the marriage was registered on 20^thJuly 2010 at Court of Collector and Marriage Officer, Bhopal. After marriage, both the parties lived together as husband and wife and their marriage was consummated at residence of respondent-husband. Out of the said wedlock, one male child namely was born on 10.11.2012. It is alleged by the appellant-wife that from the very beginning of marriage, the respondent- husband behaved very indecently and inappropriately towards the appellant-wife. It is alleged that the respondent- husband used to get drunk alcohol frequently and assault the petitioner mercilessly. It is further alleged that respondent-husband denied access of money to the appellant-wife and he also kept her entirely out from the neighbour and friends residing at his working place city in Thane, Maharashtra and if he found the appellant talking over telephone to her parents he used to assault her.

4. It is further alleged that the father of the appellant fulfilled the demand of respondent-husband and his parents by giving them cash money, gold ornaments and house-hold appliances and also gave Rs. 1 lac to the respondent on demand for paying the pagadi [advance] to the Land-lord of the rented flat at Thane, Maharashtra. It is stated that the respondent also pressurized the appellant on constant basis to bring an amount of Rs. 15 lacs from the appellant‟s parents and also demanded an SUV car from her. When the petitioner refused to fulfill such demand, she was threatened to desert her forever. The petitioner bore all cruelties of the respondent in order to save her marriage and not to spoil her whole life. The respondent has deserted the petitioner without any reasonable and justifiable cause and just after the birth of child. She was only allowed to visit Bhopal when the child became seven months old. The respondent- husband cut all communication with the wife and her child even while the appellant was staying at the place of her in- laws. Respondent's parents advised the appellant-wife to keep staying at Bhopal for an indefinite time-period and let their son to earn money in Mumbai. The appellant faced a lot of mental harassment by her in-laws while she was staying at Bhopal. Even in the Panchayat held at Bhopal, respondent-husband refused to take the appellant and child to respondent working place city i.e. Mumbai.

5. The respondent-husband refused all pleas o