SMITHA Vs. SATHYAJITH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is filed by the wife challenging the Judgment and Decree dated 15-4-2008 passed in M. C. No. 699/2005 by the III Addl. Judge. Family Court, Bangalore by which the marriage solemnized between the parties on 4- 8-2003 at Bangalore is dissolved by a decree of divorce and a sum of Rs. 20,000/- p. m. has been ordered towards interim maintenance from the date of petition till the date of decree along with litigation expenses of Rs. 10,000/-.

(2.) After condoning the delay in filing the appeal, though this matter was posted for orders on I. A. No. 11/2008, both the parties were directed to appear before the Court to explore the possibility of a settlement. However, on 5-1-2009 the counsel for the respondent filed a photo copy of the certificate of registration of marriage of the respondent with one Smt. Vyshali M. Ashok which was registered on 27-6-2008. On the subsequent dates when the parties appeared, this Court directed the parties to settle the dispute amicably by the respondent offering a reasonable permanent alimony to the appellant considering the fact that the respondent had entered into another marriage alliance and under the circumstances practically it would have been difficult for the appellant to get the benefit of any order that would have been made in her favour in the event of the appeal being allowed. The appellant however, did not accept the offer made by the respondent to pay a permanent alimony of a sum of Rs. 30,00,000/- including a sum of Rs. 7,20,000/- paid towards arrears of maintenance. Thereafter the matter was posted on subsequent dates and sufficient time was also granted to the appellant to think over about giving up her right to agitate this appeal by accepting the permanent alimony from the respondent, in view of the respondent having married again. The appellant, though a qualified dentist could not persuade herself to accept any kind of settlement in the matter but on the other hand insisted upon a judgment on merits. Under the circumstances with the consent of parties on both sides, we have heard the appeal at the stage of admission itself. We have also secured the lower Court records and perused the same.

(3.) For the sake of convenience the parties shall be referred to in terms of their status before the trial Court.