SOUMEN BHATTACHARJEE Vs. PARAMITA BHATTACHARJEE (GANGULY)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this application under Article 227 of the Constitution dated January 11, 2011, the Petitioner (hereafter the husband) calls in question order No. 7 dated December 20, 2010, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 2nd Court, Barasat. By the impugned order, the petition filed by the opposite party (hereafter the wife) under Sec. 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereafter the Act) dated September 14, 2010 was allowed on contest. It was held that the wife is entitled to alimony pendent lite of Rs. 8,000/ - per month from the date of filing of the application. The husband was also directed to pay Rs. 4,000/ - as litigation cost to the wife.

(2.) The learned Judge after noting the stand of the husband that his gross salary is Rs. 14,800/ - per month, arrived at a conclusion on perusal of his salary slip that he was earning more than what he had claimed and proceeded to grant alimony pendent lite , as noticed above.

(3.) Mr. Chattopadhyay, learned advocate appearing for the husband contended that the learned Judge failed to consider that the husband was under an obligation to maintain his old parents and that in terms of an order passed by the competent authority under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, he has been paying consolidated sum of Rs. 2,500/ - to them each month. That apart, it was also not considered by the learned Judge that earlier proceedings before the Court between the husband and the wife had been compromised on the understanding that the wife would reside with the husband, and after such compromise, on the insistence of the wife while they were living together, the husband had arranged for a separate accommodation obtaining loan from a financial institution for which he has been paying Rs. 4,178/ - on account of EMI. According to him, since the husband filed an application for restoration of conjugal rights under Sec. 9 of the Act and the wife is not willing to reside with him, the learned Judge ought not to have imposed such a heavy liability on him. The sum as awarded by the learned Judge, it was contended, is much on the higher side and it would be difficult for the husband to meet all ends and survive.