Vineet Kothari, J. - (1.) The present appeal has been filed by the appellant/husband, Pankaj Kumar, against respondent/wife, Smt. Yashoda, aggrieved by the impugned order dated 14.09.2006, by which the learned District Judge, Bhilwara, in an application under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, directed payment of monthly maintenance amount to the respondent/wife. The operative portion of the order impugned is quoted herein below for ready reference:- ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]...
(2.) Mr. Manish Shishodia, learned counsel for the appellant/husband submitted that decree of divorce by mutual consent was already granted by the learned District Judge, Bhilwara, in application under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, in Case No. 132/2003-Yashoda v. Pankaj Kumar on 24.02.2005 ; and at that time, it was agreed between the parties that there was no monetary due remained about the maintenance between the parties. The said order dated 24.02.2005 under Section 13-B of the Act is also quoted herein below for ready reference:- ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]...
(3.) In the present appeal on 27.01.2016, the following order was passed by this Court for exploring the possibility of mutual settlement of the dispute between the parties in the present case under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, which was filed by the respondent/wife, Smt. Yashoka despite the previous order dated 24.02.2005 indicating therein that learned District Judge has granted divorce decree by mutual consent and noted that no money was due thereunder, still a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- as permanent alimony was indicated to be paid by the appellant, Pankaj Kumar, to the respondent, Smt. Yashoda. The order dated 27.01.2016 passed by this Court reads as under:- "Both the learned counsels for the parties may take instructions in the present matter, as to whether, by payment of a lumpsum amount, the impugned order under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act directing the appellant-husband to pay Rs. 1500/- per month to the respondent-wife, can be affirmed and the present matrimonial dispute in this appeal can be put to an end. Since, the appellant-husband (Sic has) remarried and the divorce decree under Section 13(B) of the H.M. Act has already been granted by the concerned Family Court, the only aspect of payment of permanent alimony that was not considered by the learned Family Court concerned, is the subject matter of the present Misc. Appeal. Prima facie, this Court is of the opinion that the aspect of payment of permanent alimony was not considered by the learned Family Court concerned and, therefore, the learned Court below has not erred in directing the appellant-husband to pay Rs. 1500/- per month. This observation is also, of course, subject to the further arguments, if any. However, time prayed for is allowed to the learned counsels for updating their instructions in the matter, for permanent alimony in the lump-sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) to be paid by the appellant-husband to the respondent-wife. List the matter on 03.02.2016, as prayed. ";