SURAJMAL Vs. RUKMINIBAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shri Ajay Ukas, counsel for the appellant. The respondent is absent. None is present for her.

(2.) By this appeal the appellant is assailing correctness, propriety and legality of the order which has been passed by the 3rd Addl. District Judge, Mandsaur in the matter of H.M.A. 20/98 so far as the order of the trial Court granting permanent alimony to respondent at the rate of Rs. 800/- per month is concerned.

(3.) A matrimonial petition was filed by the present appellant Surajmal in the said court for getting divorce against the respondent Rukminibai, his wedded wife. He alleged that Rukminibai is living in adultery for 3 years prior to the presentation of matrimonial petition in the Court. He also alleged that she used to abuse him and his family members when she was residing in his house. He further alleged that in spite of notice sent to respondent and a meeting of caste panchayat, respondent did not come back to matrimonial home. The respondent contended that the appellant was assaulting her and on account of such assault it was not safe for her to stay with him along with their daughter. The daughter begotten out of the said wedlock seems to be with respondent-Rukminibai. The trial Court granted a decree of divorce in favour of the appellant and against the respondent herself dissolving their marriage. However, while deciding that matrimonial petition the trial Court granted alimony of Rs. 800/- per month to the respondent. And that alimony order is subject matter of challenge in this appeal.