BHIKALAL Vs. KAMLA BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the impugned order, the appellant has been directed to pay to the respondent a sum of Rs. 70.00 per month as permanent alimony under Sec. 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, from the date of decree of dissolution of their marriage passed in appellant's favour on the ground that the respondent wife did not comply with the decree of restitution of conjugal rights, earlier passed against her.

(2.) The record in the present case shows that after the appellant secured a decree for restitution of conjugal rights against the respondent, the respondent did not care at all to resume conjugal relations and instead exhibited an attitude of total indifference towards the appellant who, after waiting for the statutory period, approached the Court for dissolution of the marriage. In answer to the petition for divorce, the respondent filed a written statement admitting correctness of the allegations made by the appellant. She stated in quite unambiguous terms that she did not want to live with the appellant and had no intention to live with him as his wife because of temperamental differences between the two and the serious nervous strain that these differences had upon her health. At the same time, she laid a claim for permanent alimony at Rs. 70.00 per month stating the appellant's monthly income to be about Rs. 400.00. The learned District judge on such admission granted dissolution of marriage and then after recording some evidence found that the respondent has no source of income and, therefore, she is entitled to permanent alimony. Assessing the appellant's income at Rs. 441.00 per month, alimony has been fixed at Ks. 70.00 per month and has been made payable from the date of the decree for dissolution of marriage.

(3.) The grievance made by the learned counsel for the appellant is that while awarding permanent alimony under Sec. 25 of the Act, the lower Court has completely overlooked the conduct of the respondent and the other circumstances which disentitle her to the alimony claimed. The award of Rs. 70 p m. is said to be a little too high.