Mention listing in a disposed matrimonial appeal concerning permanent alimony. The appellant, having earlier refused demand drafts tendered in compliance with the alimony direction, sought to accept the money. The Court declined to further supervise closure and left her to her remedies.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
I.A. no.578 of 2024
(Arising out of MATA No.53 of 2009)
Pranati Mishra
…. Appellant
Represented By Adv. – Mrs. S. Dash, Advocate
-versus-
Chandra Sekhar Tripathy …. Respondent
Represented By Adv. – Mr. Sarat Ch. Dash, Advocate
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. SAHOO
ORDER
Order No.
24.
13.01.2025
1. The disposed of appeal has been listed under heading ‘To Be
Mentioned’ pursuant to direction made in order dated 6th January, 2025.
2. The appeal was disposed of by judgment dated 4th November,
divorce was modified in respect of permanent alimony. Direction was
for payment of aggregate ₹13,50,000/- as permanent alimony and maintenance for appellant and her daughter.
Page 1 of 3
// 2 //
3. For compliance we had directed the appeal to be listed as ‘To be Mentioned’ on 25th November, 2024. We reproduce below paragraph-3 from order dated 25th November, 2024.
“3. Mrs. Dash, learned advocate appears on behalf of appellant and submits, her client is not satisfied with direction in our judgment. In the circumstances, the drafts are returned to Mr. Dash as there cannot be record of execution, discharge or satisfaction of the direction. Respondent will be well advised to deposit the aggregate in a short term interest bearing deposit account and keep it renewed for purpose of tender in execution. Since, the drafts are being returned to respondent, the issuing bank is expected to repatriate the money (aggregate amount) to respondent’s account on presentation of the instruments. This is because the drafts were obtained for compliance of direction in our said judgment but respondent is aggrieved thereby. Issuing charges have been had by the bank and hence, we expect co-operation. Respondent has liberty to produce website copy of this order to the issuing bank.
Accordingly, the demand drafts were returned to Mr. Dash, learned advocate appearing on behalf of respondent. Appellant then came back and said she wanted to accept the monies. For purpose of being assured we requireD presence of appellant and production of the short
Page 2 of 3
// 3 //
term deposit receipt said to have been made by respondent, upon aggregate value OF the demand drafts, repatriated to him.
4. Mr. Dash hands up term deposit advice dated 29th November, 2024 for principal sum ₹10,00,000/-, maturity date 16th February, 2026 for value ₹10,91,356/-. Mrs. Das submits, her client is present in Court and confirms her willingness to accept the amount.
5. Earlier we had required respondent to produce demand drafts so that appellant would receive immediately, what we had directed in modification. On appellant’s refusal, the money was returned and respondent has converted the proceeds to a term deposit. It will take time for prematurely encashing the term deposit and making out fresh demand drafts in favour of appellant and the daughter. There is no certainty that appellant will stick to her position. In the circumstances, we will not further venture to achieve closure of the matter. Appellant
is at liberty to find her remedy, whether by appeal or by execution. The term deposit receipt is returned to Mr. Dash.
(Arindam Sinha) Judge
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed Signed by: SISIR KUMAR SETHI Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: ORISSA HIGH COURT Date: 13-Jan-2025 18:20:21
(M.S. Sahoo) Judge
Sks
Page 3 of 3
Pranati Mishra
Chandra Sekhar Tripathy
Arindam Sinha
M.S. Sahoo
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
