Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Shrimati Ripa Neogi (Kabashi) @ Ripa ... vs Soumitra Neogi on 13 January, 2025
20-21
13.01.2025
Ct. No.22
pg.
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CIVIL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
CO 1947 of 2016
Shrimati Ripa Neogi (Kabashi) @ Ripa Neogy
Vs.
Soumitra Neogi
with
CO 1948 of 2016
Shrimati Ripa Neogi (Kabashi) @ Ripa Neogy
Vs.
Soumitra Neogi
Mr. Debasish Roy
Mr. Debnath Mahata
... For the petitioner
In re: CO 1948 of 2016
1.Mr. Debasish Roy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that the instant revisional application was filed assailing the order dated 18th April, 2016 passed in connection with Matrimonial Suit No.287 of 2015 where the petitioner was disallowed to file written statement. It is further submitted that subsequently the learned Trial Judge, by an order dated 16th July, 2016, permitted the petitioner to file written statement which was filed and accepted. Pursuant to the situation, according to the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the instant revisional application has become infructuous.
2. In the aforesaid view of the matter, the instant revisional application stands dismissed as infructuous. 2
In re: CO 1947 of 2016
3. Affidavit of service filed in Court today is taken on record.
4. In spite of service, none appears on behalf of the opposite party.
5. Challenge in this revisional application is the order dated 10th March, 2016 passed in connection with Matrimonial Suit No.287 of 2015 wherein the learned Additional District Judge, First Court, Sealdah, South 24-Parganas, was pleased to reject the stay application filed by the petitioner/wife for non-payment of alimony pendente lite in connection with Matrimonial Suit No.56 of 2003 under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act with a prayer for restitution of conjugal rights.
6. It is not disputed that the opposite party/husband filed a suit under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act before the learned District Judge, Alipore registered as Matrimonial Suit No.56 of 2003, which, in turn, transferred to the Court of the learned Additional District Judge, 13th Court, Alipore, for disposal. Learned Additional District Judge, 13th Court, Alipore allowed the application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act filed by the petitioner/wife promulgating alimony pendente lite at the rate of Rs.2,500/- per month along with litigation cost of Rs.5,000/-.
7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that the opposite party/ 3 husband did not pay the alimony pendente lite leading to accrual of arrears of Rs.57,000/- and for non-compliance of the order passed under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, petitioner/wife filed an application for stay of that particular suit, being Matrimonial Suit No.56 of 2003.
8. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has further submitted that the opposite party/ husband filed another suit for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, which was registered as Matrimonial Suit No.287 of 2015 and that was transferred to the learned Additional District Judge, First Court, Sealdah where the petitioner/wife again filed an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act with a prayer for alimony pendente lite and according to the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act is yet to be disposed of.
9. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, one stay application was filed before the Court of the learned Additional District Judge, First Court, Sealdah in connection with Matrimonial Suit No.287 of 2015 with a prayer for stay of non-payment of alimony pendente lite ordered under Section 24 in connection with Matrimonial Suit No.56 of 2003.
10. It is not disputed that one stay application was filed by the petitioner/wife in Matrimonial Suit No.56 of 2003 4 and the application for stay was allowed and the learned Judge passed an order directing stay of the proceedings in connection with Matrimonial Suit No.56 of 2003 till payment of arrears of alimony pendente lite and the litigation cost.
11. Now, it is not disputed that the Matrimonial Suit No.287 of 2015 which was filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act is still awaiting disposal of the application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act and the learned Judge did not consider the stay of the subsequent suit under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act during pendency of an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
12. In the aforesaid view of the matter, I find no irregularity in the order dated on 10th March, 2016 passed in connection with Matrimonial Suit No.287 of 2015 where no alimony pendente lite has been ordered under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act which is, in fact, pending before the learned Judge.
13. As a sequel, the revisional application, being devoid of merit, stands dismissed.
14. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
15. Connected application, if any, also stands disposed of.
5
16. All parties shall act on the basis of a server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.
17. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties, upon compliance of necessary formalities.
(Bibhas Ranjan De, J.)