Advocates:
['DEVESH CHANDRA VERMA', '', 'ANIMESH VERMA', 'ANURAG VERMA', 'SOUMYA RAI', 'Anshuman Rabra', 'ROHISHEK VERMA']

1

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

FAM No. 197 of 2019

Kamlesh Manikpuri S/o Aarti Das Manikpuri Aged About 39 Years R/o

House No. Mig 1/33, Housing Board Colony, Khamtarai, District

Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., --- Appellant

Versus

Smt. Geeta Manikpuri W/o Kamlesh Manikpuri Aged About 36 Years

R/o Village And Post Aurai, Police Station And Tahsil Bichhiya,

District Mandala Madhya Pradesh, District : Mandla, Madhya Pradesh

---- Respondent

For the Appellant

:

Shri Devesh Chand Verma, Advocate

with Mr. Animesh Verma, Advocate

For the Respondent

:

Shri Rahil Arun Kochar, Advocate

FA(MAT) No. 66 of 2019

Smt. Geeta Manikpuri W/o Kamlesh Manikpuri Aged About 38 Years

R/o Village And Aurai, P.S. Bichhiya, District Mandla Madhya

Pradesh...(Applicant), District : Mandla, Madhya Pradesh ---

Appellant

Versus

Kamlesh Manikpuri S/o Aarti Das Manikpuri Aged About 39 Years R/o

H. No. Mig 1/33 , Housing Board Colony Khamtarai, District Bilaspur

Chhattisgarh....(Respondents), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---

Respondent

For the Appellant

:

Shri Rahil Arun Kochar, Advocate.

For the Respondent

:

Shri Devesh Chand Verma, Advocate

with Mr. Animesh Verma, Advocate

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri, Judge &

Hon'ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal, Judge

2

Judgment on Board

Per Goutam Bhaduri

29

.09.2022

1. These are two appeals separately filed by both husband and

wife against the order dated 07.03.2019 passed by the

Family Court Bilaspur in Civil Suit No.208A/2017 whereby the

petition filed by the husband seeking divorce was allowed on

the ground of cruelty and desertion against which the wife

filed appeal whereas in respect of application filed by wife

u/s 27 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking disposal of the

property presented during the time of marriage, a

consolidated sum of Rs.1 lakh was granted, against which,

the appeal was preferred by the husband. The husband

contended in appeal that the amount of Rs..1 lakh which has

been ordered under section 27 is without any evidence

whereas the wife has raised the contention that the divorce

granted to the husband is bad in law as also the amount of

Rs.1 lakh, which has been granted u/s 27 towards the

valuable articles given in marriage, is too meagre and apart

from that no permanent alimony has been given.

2. Brief facts of these cases are that the marriage between the

parties took place on 22.05.2002. The husband stated that

after marriage, he was forced by the wife to stay separate

and she never used to discharge her matrimonial obligations

and when he requested to fulfill such obligations, she used to

abuse and extend threat to inculpate in a false case.

Because of such threat, the entire family of the husband

3

used to live in fear and eventually as expected a false report

was made on 26.11.2006 by the wife, upon which, a case

was registered u/s 498-A of IPC. The husband further stated

that despite all possible efforts made, the wife refused to

cohabit with him and has been living apart since 26.11.2006,

as such, she had deserted him without any lawful cause. It is

further stated that in respect of the report made under u/s

498-A the trial was conducted which eventually resulted into

acquittal. So it would go to show that on false allegations,

not only the husband and his family members suffered the

torment of trial but also their image was damaged in

Society, which would also amount to cruelty.

3. Per contra, Mr. Rahil Kochar, learned counsel appearing on

behalf of wife contended that the wife was subjected to

cruelty for demand of dowry and eventually when the torture

aggravated, she made a report to Mahila Police Station. It is

further stated that the husband has kept another lady as his

wife and when the wife wanted to join his company, she was

forced to get away, ther