Calcutta HC orders the district court docket to rule once more on the alimony declare

The Kolkata High Court in Jalpaiguri on Wednesday ordered District Judge Cooch Behar to reconsider the application for alimony made by a wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, in line with the High Court’s proposal in Rajnesh v .Nah.

The Supreme Court ruling in Rajnesh v. Neha requires that the Assets and Liabilities Disclosure Affidavit be filed by both parties in all alimony proceedings, including pending proceedings in the affected Family Court/District Court/Magistrates Court across the country.

Single Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya overturned District Judge Cooch Behar’s order awarding applicant’s wife maintenance of Rs.7,000/- per month and legal expenses of Rs.5,000/-, without considering the fact that the applicant’s husband has not filed an affidavit regarding disclosure of assets and liabilities.

The petitioner claimed that the alimony in question was exorbitant as he was a retired school teacher. It has further been argued that the court awarding alimony set out in Rajnesh v. Neha (2021) 2 SCC 324 failed to comply as no affidavit was ever submitted by him.

The wife originally applied for alimony of Rs. 40,000/- per month and stated that the husband has an income of Rs. 1,25,000/- per month from his salary and other business.

The court found:

“Although a competent counsel for the petitioner is entitled to argue that the proposal laid down in Rajnesh v. Neha has not been adhered to at all in the present case, on humanitarian grounds and given that the marriage between the petitioner and the opposing party is still in existence, may.” It cannot be disputed that the petitioner is entitled to receive at least some amount of ad hoc maintenance from the petitioner’s husband.”

The court ordered District Judge Cooch Behar to reconsider the alimony application subject to ordering the filing of affidavits by both parties in accordance with the proposal of the Rajnesh Supreme Court v. Neha within 6 months.

However, the court ruled that the plaintiff husband should pay the opposing party’s wife an amount of Rs. 4,000/- per month on an ad hoc basis for the maintenance of the opposing party’s wife, apart from the medical expenses incurred by the wife.

Case title: Nripendra Chandra Mahanta v. smt Pramila Mahanta

Coram: Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya

Click here to read/download the judgment