Partly allowed

Arnab Mukherjee v. Rikhia Mukherjee @ Rekhia Mukherjee & Anr.

Calcutta HC22 Feb 2023FA/58/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge Family Court disposed of an appeal against a divorce decree and maintenance order under the Special Marriage Act. The court set aside the wife's maintenance due to her post-decrees remarriage but affirmed maintenance for the minor child.

What did the court decide?

Maintenance of Rs. 8,000/- per month in favor of the wife was set aside; maintenance for the minor daughter was affirmed.

Arnab Mukherjee Vs Rikhia Mukherjee @ Rekhia… — Maintenance and Alimony | Calcutta HC (2023)

¶1

03 22.02.2023 Ct-08

¶2

¶3

FA 58 of 2020 with I.A No. CAN 1 of 2020 CAN 2 of 2022 CAN 3 of 2022

¶4

Shri Arnab Mukherjee Vs. Smt. Rikhia Mukherjee @ Rekhia Mukherjee & Anr.

¶5

Mr. Sourav Sen … For the Appellant

¶6

Mr. Soumen Das … For the Respondents

¶7

The parties are present in court today.

¶8

The following order is dictated in presence of the parties along with their learned advocates. The appeal and the applications for additional evidence are heard together and disposed of by this common order.

¶9

The appellant filed the suit for divorce on the ground of cruelty, desertion and adultery under Section 27(1) of the Special Marriage Act. The suit was decreed on the ground of cruelty and desertion under Section 27(1b) and (1d) of the Special Marriage Act. The plaintiff could not prove the adultery. Learned Additional District Judge,1^st Court at Barasat, North 24 Parganas while disposing of the suit has allowed maintenance @Rs.8,000/- per month for the minor daughter under Section 38 of the Special Marriage Act and Rs.8,000/- per month towards the alimony for the opposite party no. 1/wife.

¶10

In this appeal it is alleged that there are sufficient material to prove the adultery. The appeal is filed against the findings recorded by the learned Additional District Judge that the

¶11

¶12

adultery could not be proved.

¶13

It is submitted that although decree for divorce was granted, the entitlement of the wife to receive maintenance would depend upon a finding with regard to the adultery. There is also no discussion in the impugned judgment and decree with regard to the basis of quantification of the maintenance in favour of the wife.

¶14

Consequent upon filing of the application for additional evidence, we directed the respondent/wife to file an affidavit stating whether she has remarried or not. The wife has candidly disclosed the factum of her remarriage after the judgment and decree dated 17^th August, 2019 and she also stated that she had begotten a male child from the second marriage. She also disclosed the name of her present husband and stated that she could not have claimed any maintenance under any description from her first husband.

¶15

In view of the subsequent marriage of the respondent/wife, she is not entitled to maintenance. Accordingly, the decree directing payment of maintenance Rs. 8,000/- per month towards the opposite party no. 1/wife is set aside. However, the maintenance payable to the female child is affirmed.

¶16

On such consideration, the appeal succeeds in part.

¶17

In view of disposal of the appeal, all connected applications are also disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶18

(Uday Kumar, J.) (Soumen Sen, J.)

¶19

Arnab Mukherjee v. Rikhia Mukherjee @ Rekhia Mukherjee & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arnab Mukherjee v. Rikhia Mukherjee @ Rekhia Mukherjee & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jayanta Sarkar Vs Rubi Sarkar

Narugopal Faujdar Vs Kalabati Debi

For Kotwali Anchal & Village Sree Sree Lakshmi Narayan Bigra Vs Subodh Pathak

Sudera Realty Private Limited Vs Indian Oil Corporation Limited

Amal Mondal Vs Sankari Mondal

Sanjoy Ghosh Vs Mousumi Ghosh & Ors.