Rahul Purkayastha vs Smt. Chaitali Purkayastha

Prasenjit Mandal, J.—This application is at the instance of the husband and is directed against the Order No. 13 dated March 28, 2011 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Barrackpore in Matrimonial Suit No. 464 of 2009 thereby disposing of an application u/s 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

The short fact is that the husband / petitioner herein instituted a suit for divorce on the ground of desertion and cruelty against the wife / opposite party herein before the learned District Judge, Barasat and the said suit was transferred to the court of the Additional District Judge, Barrackpore and renumbered as Matrimonial Suit No. 464 of 2009. The wife / opposite party herein is contesting the said suit and she filed an application u/s 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act which was disposed of by the impugned order granting maintenance at the rate of Rs.5,000/- per month for the wife / opposite party and her daughter. A sum of Rs.10,000/- was also granted as litigation cost. Being aggrieved, this application has been preferred.

Now, the question is whether the impugned order should be sustained.

Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on going through the materials on record, I find that there is no dispute that the husband / petitioner herein was a clerk of the Army Service Corps (ASC), that he took voluntary retirement from service and that at present, he is getting a pension of Rs.7,646/- per month. The wife has contended that the husband is getting a salary Rs.15,000/- from his present service and a pension of Rs.5,000/- after retirement from the service of the Army Service Corps (ASC).

Admittedly, there was a marriage between the parties according to the rights and customs of the Hindu Marriage Act and a daughter was born in the wedlock and the said daughter is now 12 years of age and is studying. The husband has denied that he is getting a salary of Rs.15,000/- per month approximately from his present employment; but I find that the husband did not retire on superannuation or under the provisions of the said ASC on attaining a particular age, but, he retired from service on his own accord. He knew very well that he was to pay the maintenance for the wife and the daughter. In consideration of the price hike of the present days of the essential commodities, the alimony of Rs.5,000/- per month total for the two cannot be said to be excessive at all.

Mr. Swapan Kr. Mallick, the learned Advocate for the petitioner has contended that his client is getting a pension of Rs.7,646/- only and so, if such an amount is paid, a very nominal amount is left for the survival of the husband and his mother. Since, the husband has retired from his service on his own accord, it can be presumed that he had done so on realising that he was to pay the maintenance for the wife and the daughter. So, there is no question of reducing the quantum of maintenance as granted by the learned Trial Judge and consequently, the submission of the learned Advocate for the petitioner cannot be accepted.

As a last resort, the learned Advocate for the petitioner has contended that the litigation cost was granted to the tune of Rs.10,000/- and this is also excessive. In consideration of the present charges for litigation, I am of the view this cost cannot be said to be excessive at all and if the cost appears to be excessive for him for making payment by one instalment, he can pray for paying of the same by two instalments before the learned Trial Judge and if such prayer is made, the learned Trial Judge shall dispose of the same in accordance with law.

The petitioner has filed certain papers relating to illness of his mother and the fact that he has to bear expenses for the treatment of his mother and other charges. Whatever may be the husband cannot ignore the payment of alimony for his wife and the daughter.

Under the circumstances, I do not find any justified reason to interfere with the matter. The application is, therefore, devoid of merits.

It is, therefore, dismissed.

Considering the circumstances, there will be no order as to costs.

Urgent xerox certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the learned Advocates for the parties on their usual undertaking.