Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

N. Sreeenivasa Rau, Offg. C.J.

1. Both these appeals are directed against the decision of the Principal Civil Judge, Bangalore, who, while granting a decree of divorce to the peti-tioner (husband), awarded permanent alimony to the Respondent (wife) at Rs. 35/- per month from March 1961 and refused to grant her maintenance pendents lite and expenses of the proceedings applied for by her. In Miscellaneous Appeal No. 155/61 the husband challenges the grant of alimony, while in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 156/61 the wife complains that the amount granted is inadequate and that the refusal of interim alimony and expenses was unjustified and urges certain other minor grievances also.

4. Dealing with the question of alimony, the learned Judge of the court below says that the wife's claim of Rs. 70/- per month on the basis of l/3rd of the husband's income being an appropriate measure cannot be accepted, as no authority has been shown and the granting of alimony is discretionary. He says that having regard to ihe cir-cumstances of the case, viz., that the wife is young and has been used to a fairly decent standard of living and to the status of the parties, a sum of Rs. 35/- would be reasonable. He also adds that in awarding the amount he is bearing in mind the fact that the petitioner (husband) possibly intends to marry again and the bringing up of a family in these days is Expensive. He further says that if the Respondent (wife) is at a later time in a position to maintain herself, the petitioner could approach the court for a reconsideration of the amount of alimony awarded.

It may at once be said that the possibility of the petitioner embarking upon another marriage and the consequent increase in his expenses was not a relevant circumstance in considering what was the appropriate amount to be awarded as alimony in the existing situation. If the petitioner married again and found that his situation required any modification in regard to the alimony, it would be for him to approach the court when the matter would be considered. As regards the Respondent attaining a position in which she can. maintain herself, the learned Judge himself, has stated that the petitioner may approach the court again end has not taken that possibility as a circumstance for asscssing the alimony to be granted.

9. The result of the discussion above is that the Respondent is awarded interim maintenance at Rs. 40/- per month from 30-12-1960 up tp and inclusive of 11-2-1961 and Rs. 50/- towards the expenses of the proceedings and, in modification of the order of the Court below, she is awarded permanent alimony at Rs. 50/- per month with effect from 12-2-1961. The aggregate amount due in respect of interim alimony, expenses of the proceedings and permanent alimony from 12-2-1961 up to the end of March 1962 less the amount already paid shall be paid by the Appellant (husband) on or before the 10th of April 1962. The permanent alimony in respect of the month of April and subsequent months shall be paid on or before the 10th of the succeeding month.