S.K. Sahoo JUDGMENT
S.K. Sahoo, J.
"Aja Yudhhe Muni Sraddhe
Prabhate Megha Dumbare
Dampatya Kalahechaiva
Bahvarambhe Laghu Kriya"
-Chanakya
(Fighting of the goats, shraddha ceremony performed by the sages, rumbling of the clouds early in the morning and quarrel between husband and wife; all begin in a grand style but the outcome is insignificant.)
1. This case depicts the tormentous life of a couple who started quarreling with each other on day two of their marriage with disagreement which gradually led to confrontation. They did not function like the two wings of the same bird for which their marital life never got off the ground. They fought with each other tooth and nail forgetting all the promises taken around sacred fire. There remained no love and respect to each other and finally, it is the collapse of their nuptial tie.
2. Asutosh Sarangi (hereafter 'the petitioner-husband') filed a petition under section 13(1)(i-a)(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 on 16.9.2009 in the Court of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhubaneswar which was registered as MAT. Case No. 1106 of 2009 against Mrs. Reeta Dhara (hereafter 'the respondent-wife') with a prayer for a decree of dissolution of marriage solemnized between the parties on 8th May 2008 and in the alternative for a decree of judicial separation. The case was transferred to the learned Judge, Family Court, Bhubaneswar and accordingly it was re-registered as Civil Proceeding No. 41 of 2011.
The learned trial Judge vide impugned judgment and order dated 25.9.2014 allowed the petition filed by the petitioner-husband and passed a decree of divorce declaring the marriage between the petitioner-husband and the respondent-wife dissolved with effect from the date of decree and further directing the petitioner-husband to pay permanent alimony of Rs. 30,00,000/- (thirty lakhs) to the respondent-wife.
3. The petitioner-husband filed appeal under section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 vide MATA No. 122 of 2014 challenging the quantum of permanent alimony as fixed by the learned trial Judge in the impugned judgment and order dated 25.9.2014 with a prayer to reduce the amount.
The respondent-wife on the other hand filed appeal under section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 vide MATA No. 126 of 2014 to set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 25.9.2014 passed by the learned trial Judge.
Since both the appeals arise out of a common judgment and there is commonality of parties, the dispute as well as question of law in both these cases, with the consent of the parties, the appeals were heard analogously and the same are being disposed of by this common judgment.
4. In a nutshell, it is the case of the petitioner-husband that he is a defence personnel working as Executive Officer in Indian Naval Ship at Mumbai and his marriage with the respondent-wife was solemnized on 8th May 2008 at Hotel Presidency, Bhubaneswar as per Hindu rites and custom. On the very next day of the marriage i.e. on 9th May 2008, the respondent-wife forced the petitioner-husband twice to consummate the marriage which was not possible as the parents and relations were present in the house. Since the petitioner-husband refrained himself from the persuasions of the respondent-wife, she became furious and behaved with her husband in a very discourteous manner. When the petitioner-husband asked the respondent-wife about the reasons for her abnormal behaviour, she replied that she wanted a child immediately so that she would establish her legal rights. The respondent-wife insulted the petitioner-husband before others saying that the petitioner-husband was an impotent person and require medical checkup which caused humiliation to the petitioner-husband. Though on subsequent occasions, there was sexual intercourse between the parties but the respondent-wife was not satisfied........