advocatemmmohan

My photo

ADVOCATEMMMOHAN -  Practicing both IN CIVIL, CRIMINAL AND FAMILY LAWS,Etc.,

WELCOME TO LEGAL WORLD

WELCOME TO MY LEGAL WORLD - FOR KNOWLEDGE IN LAW & FOR LEGAL OPINIONS - SHARE THIS

Friday, September 19, 2014

Divorce - Permanent alimony - Divorce granted - Permanent alimony granted at 24 lakhs - High court enhanced the same to Rs. 40 lakhs - Apex court reduced the same to Rs.15 lakhs = CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 8459-8462 OF 2014 (Arising out of Special Leave petition (Civil) Nos.9694-9697 of 2012) V.K. Vasantha Kumari …Appellant Versus R. Sudhakar …Respondent = 2014 - Sept. Month - http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/filename=41881

Divorce - Permanent alimony - Divorce granted - Permanent alimony granted at 24 lakhs - High court enhanced the same to Rs. 40 lakhs - Apex court reduced the same to Rs.15 lakhs =

The said interlocutory application  came  to
be disposed of by an order dated 3.11.2009 by  the  IInd  Additional  Family
Court, Chennai granting an amount of Rs.24 lakhs as permanent alimony.=
High court-
“36.  Since the  appellant  is  having  three  children,  in  the  event  of
vacating the existing premises, if she takes on lease at least a  three  bed
room flat in a decent locality, she would have to spend at least Rs.25,000/-
 per month, apart from the other expenses.
But the appellant  is  occupying
the respondent house.  Since, the appellant had  submitted  that  her  first
daughter is employed, she would also be earning.  The appellant, as  pointed
out above is having two properties at Injambakkam and sea Shore  town  worth
about Rs.2 crores.
Taking into consideration all these aspects, we  are  of
the considered view that the appellant may require at least Rs.40,000/-  per
month to meet the expenses.
For getting Rs.40,000/-  per  month  as  return
she may have to invest Rs.40,00,000/-.  The Family court awarded  a  sum  of
Rs.24,00,000/- as  permanent  alimony.  
Considering  the  present  cost  of
living, we are of the considered view that the permanent alimony awarded  by
the IInd Additional Family Court, Chennai is on the lower side and the  same
should be increased to Rs.40,00,000/-.
 Accordingly, the  permanent  alimony
awarded by the Family Court is increased to Rs.40,00,000/-.

37.   Therefore, the fair and final order of the Family Court passed  in  IA
No.409 of 2009  in  H.M.O.P.  No.571  of  2004  on  the  file  of  the  IInd
Additional Family Court, Chennai  is  modified  by  awarding  Rs.40,00,000/-
(Rupees Forty Lacs  only) as permanent alimony to the appellant/petitioner.
38.   In the result, C.M.A. No.933 of 2010  is  partly  allowed  and  C.M.A.
No.543 of 2010 stands dismissed.  M.P. (MD) No.1 of 2011 in  CMA  No.543  of
2010 is dismissed and M.P. (MD) No.1 of 2010 is closed.  No costs.”
Apex court
  In the facts and circumstances of the case, we find  justification  in
the demand made by the appellant. We, therefore, direct  the  respondent  to
pay another Rs.15,00,000/- (rupees fifteen  lakhs)  to  the  appellant  wife
towards permanent alimony within a period of thirty days from today.

2014 - Sept. Month - http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/filename=41881

                                                                  Reportable
                        IN THE SUPREME COUR OF INDIA
                        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                    CIVIL APPEAL NOS.  8459-8462  OF 2014
    (Arising out of Special Leave petition (Civil) Nos.9694-9697 of 2012)


V.K. Vasantha Kumari                         …Appellant

            Versus

R. Sudhakar                                  …Respondent





                               J U D G M E N T



Chelameswar, J.


1.    Leave granted.

2.    The instant appeal is filed by the appellant wife being not  satisfied
with the order of the High Court of Madras in CMA Nos.543 and  933  of  2010
and M.P. No.1 of 2010 and M.P. No.1 of 2011 in the above mentioned CMAs.






3.    The appellant  and  the  respondent  were  wife  and  husband.   Their
marriage  took  place  in  1986.   It  is  an  unfortunate  case  where  the
relationship between the appellant and respondent ran into  trouble.   There
are three grown up children out of the said wedlock.

4.    In the year 2004, the respondent husband filed  FCOP  No.571  of  2004
before the IInd Additional Family Court at Chennai seeking divorce from  the
appellant  on  the  ground  of  cruelty.   The  said  FCOP  was  allowed  on
3.11.2009.  But both the parties carried  the  appeals  No.544  and  932  of
2010.  Both the appeals were disposed of by a common order dated  25.1.2011.
 The appellate decree insofar it is relevant for our purpose reads thus:
“2.   That the Judge and Decree of Court below  in  respect  of  clause  (1)
i.e., the marriage dissolved by the decree  of  divorce  on  the  ground  of
cruelty be and hereby is set aside and the marriage is  dissolved  based  on
the ‘no objection’ endorsement made by petitioner in the petition.”


5.    The children of the parties filed Suit No.677 of 2004 before the  High
Court of Madras for partition of the plaint scheduled property.

6.    From the impugned order it can be seen that there are  thirteen  items
in the partition suit referred to above.  According to the respondent,  some
of these items are already sold  off.  Admittedly,  even  according  to  the
respondent the family has been maintaining five vehicles.

7.    The partition suit is  still  pending  after  a  decade.   During  the
pendency of the above mentioned two  proceedings,  innumerable  interlocutory
applications came to be filed by various parties. It may  not  be  necessary
and profitable to describe all the proceedings.

8.    The appellant moved an interlocutory application under Section  24  of
the Hindu Marriage Act,  1955  for  grant  of  interim  maintenance  in  the
divorce original petition filed by  the  husband.   The  said  Interlocutory
Application No.3475 of 2004 was dismissed by the Family Court  on  3.2.2007.
  Against the said order, the appellant herein filed a Civil Revision  being
CRP (PO) No.1168 of 2007 before the High Court of Madras which was  disposed
of by an order dated 15.10.2008.  The relevant portion of the  order  is  as
follows:
“5.   In the result, this Civil Revision Petition  is  disposed  of  with  a
direction to the IInd Additional Judge, Family court, Chennai to dispose  of
the divorce petition along with  application  for  permanent  alimony,  that
would be filed by  the  petitioner  herein/wife  and  also  the  arrears  of
maintenance on the basis of the details that would be filed by  her,  within
the period stipulated  by  the  Hon’ble  1st  Bench  of  this  court,  while
disposing of the OSA No.179 of 2008 on 14.07.06.”

9.    Pursuant to the said  direction  of  the  High  Court,  the  appellant
herein filed  another  Interlocutory  Application  No.409  of  2009  in  the
Original Petition  No.571  of  2004  referred  to  above  seeking  permanent
alimony of Rs.1 lakh per month. The said interlocutory application  came  to
be disposed of by an order dated 3.11.2009 by  the  IInd  Additional  Family
Court, Chennai granting an amount of Rs.24 lakhs as permanent alimony.

10.   Aggrieved by the said order, the  respondent  husband  herein  carried
the matter in appeal (by CMA  No.543  of  2010)  to  the  High  Court.   Not
satisfied with the amount granted,  the  appellant  wife  also  carried  the
matter in appeal (by CMA No.933 of 2010) before the High Court.  Both  these
matters came to be  disposed  of  by  the  impugned  order.   The  operative
portion of the impugned order reads as under:
“36.  Since the  appellant  is  having  three  children,  in  the  event  of
vacating the existing premises, if she takes on lease at least a  three  bed
room flat in a decent locality, she would have to spend at least Rs.25,000/-
 per month, apart from the other expenses.  But the appellant  is  occupying
the respondent house.  Since, the appellant had  submitted  that  her  first
daughter is employed, she would also be earning.  The appellant, as  pointed
out above is having two properties at Injambakkam and sea Shore  town  worth
about Rs.2 crores.  Taking into consideration all these aspects, we  are  of
the considered view that the appellant may require at least Rs.40,000/-  per
month to meet the expenses.  For getting Rs.40,000/-  per  month  as  return
she may have to invest Rs.40,00,000/-.  The Family court awarded  a  sum  of
Rs.24,00,000/- as  permanent  alimony.   Considering  the  present  cost  of
living, we are of the considered view that the permanent alimony awarded  by
the IInd Additional Family Court, Chennai is on the lower side and the  same
should be increased to Rs.40,00,000/-.  Accordingly, the  permanent  alimony
awarded by the Family Court is increased to Rs.40,00,000/-.

37.   Therefore, the fair and final order of the Family Court passed  in  IA
No.409 of 2009  in  H.M.O.P.  No.571  of  2004  on  the  file  of  the  IInd
Additional Family Court, Chennai  is  modified  by  awarding  Rs.40,00,000/-
(Rupees Forty Lacs  only) as permanent alimony to the appellant/petitioner.

38.   In the result, C.M.A. No.933 of 2010  is  partly  allowed  and  C.M.A.
No.543 of 2010 stands dismissed.  M.P. (MD) No.1 of 2011 in  CMA  No.543  of
2010 is dismissed and M.P. (MD) No.1 of 2010 is closed.  No costs.”


      11.   Aggrieved by the said order the respondent  herein  carried  the
matter to this Court in SLP Nos. 2506-2507 of 2012 which  was  dismissed  by
an order of this Court on 30.01.2012.  Thereafter, the respondent  deposited
the amount of Rs.40 lakhs and the same is recorded by this Court vide  order
dated  26.11.2013.   Therefore,  the  finding  of  the  High  Court,   while
determining the question of permanent alimony of  the  appellant,  that  the
appellant requires the amount of Rs.40,000/- per  month  has  become  final.
The issue in the instant appeal is limited.  The appellant has  prayed  that
having regard to the fluctuating rate of interest  on  fixed  deposits,  the
amount of Rs.40 lakhs will not constantly fetch an interest  of  Rs.40,000/-
per month, an appropriate order be passed to ensure that she gets a  monthly
sum of Rs.40,000/- towards her maintenance.

      12.   We have heard the learned counsel for the respondent.

13.   In the facts and circumstances of the case, we find  justification  in
the demand made by the appellant. We, therefore, direct  the  respondent  to
pay another Rs.15,00,000/- (rupees fifteen  lakhs)  to  the  appellant  wife
towards permanent alimony within a period of thirty days from today.

      14.   The appeals are accordingly disposed of  with  no  order  as  to
costs.


                                                               ………………………….J.
                                                         (J. Chelameswar)


                                                             .……………………..….J.
                                                   (A.K. Sikri)
New Delhi;
September 04, 2014


















                        IN THE SUPREME COUR OF INDIA
                        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                    CIVIL APPEAL NOS.  8459-8462 OF 2014
    (Arising out of Special Leave petition (Civil) Nos.9694-9697 of 2012)


V.K. Vasantha Kumari                         …Appellant

            Versus

R. Sudhakar                                  …Respondent



                               J U D G M E N T


      After the order is pronounced, a prayer is  made  by        Mr.  Ankur
Saigal, learned counsel  appearing  for  the  respondent  husband  that  the
respondent be given a period of two months  to  comply  with  the  direction
given today.  We, therefore, direct the husband to make the  payment  within
a period of 8 weeks from today instead  of  30  days,  as  directed  in  the
judgment.

                                                               ………………………….J.
                                                         (J. Chelameswar)

                                                             .……………………..….J.
                                                   (A.K. Sikri)
New Delhi;
September 04, 2014


-----------------------
9


No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.