Husband-appellant's divorce petition has been allowed. However, he has been directed to pay Rs.3,000/- per month alimony to the wife-respondent. Plaintiff is aggrieved by this direction hence this appeal has been filed only against the said direction.
I do not find any error in the said direction. The argument that the wife had not claimed monthly alimony and she had claimed fixed alimony, hence the Court had no jurisdiction to pass the order of monthly alimony is not tenable. In respect of alimony, the Court may pass such order which it considers appropriate under the facts and circumstances of the case under Section 25 of Hindu Marriage Act.
Learned counsel for the husband-appellant further argued that wife-respondent had filed application for maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C., and appellant may be required to pay double maintenance. This apprehension is not well founded. As the alimony of Rs.3,000/- per month has been directed to be paid through the impugned judgment and decree dated 20.05.2011 passed by Additional District Judge, Court No.1, Fatehpur in petition no.175 of 2010 Rajendra Prasad Pandey Vs. Smt. Munni Devi, which was under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, hence no further amount would be required to be paid under Section 125 Cr.P.C., provided that plaintiff-appellant continues to pay the amount of Rs.3,000/- per month as directed by impugned judgment dated 20.05.2011.
Accordingly, first appeal is dismissed under Order 41 Rule 11 CPC.
The above observation regarding maintenance/ alimony have been made without issuing notice or hearing respondent-wife. If she feels aggrieved by the observations she is at liberty to apply for recall of this order.
In case, wife files an appeal against the impugned judgment and decree then application for recall of this order through which appeal has been dismissed in limine may be filed by appellant.
Order Date :- 5.9.2011 vks