Judgment/Order – Reasoned Order – Family Court passed a decree of divorce by dissolving the marriage of appellant-husband and respondent-wife – The Court also directed the appellanthusband to pay permanent alimony of Rs.15,00,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs.10,000/- to the respondent-wife – Aggrieved with the part of order which directed appellant to pay permanent alimony, appellant filed appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court, which was dismissed – Whether the Division Bench of the High Court was justified in dismissing the appellant’s appeal in limine and thereby upholding the order of the Family Court insofar as it related to awarding permanent alimony to the respondent-wife – Held: No – On perusal of the order of the Family Court and the High Court, it would show that both Courts failed to apply their judicial mind to the factual and legal controversy insofar as award of permanent alimony to the respondent-wife is concerned – Both the Courts did not even mention the factual narration of the case set up by the parties on the question of award of permanent alimony and without there being any discussion, appreciation, reasoning and categorical findings on the material issues such as, financial earning capacity of wife, a direction to pay Rs.15,00,000/- by way of permanent alimony to the wife was given – Direction wholly unsustainable in law – Neither the Family Court nor the High Court considered the legal principles applicable to the issues involved and passed cryptic and unreasoned orders.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1. Mere perusal of the order of the Family Court and the High Court would go to show that both the Courts failed to apply their judicial mind to the factual and legal controversy insofar as award of permanent alimony to the respondent(wife) is concerned. Both the Courts did not even mention the factual narration of the case set up by the parties on the question of award of permanent alimony and without there being any discussion, appreciation, reasoning and categorical findings on the material issues such as, financial earning capacity of husband to pay the alimony and also the financial earning capacity of wife, a direction to pay Rs.15,00,000/- by way of permanent alimony to the wife was given. Such direction is wholly unsustainable in law. [Para 15] [494-B-D]
2. Time and again, this Court has emphasized on the Courts the need to pass reasoned order in every case, which must contain the narration of the bare facts of the case of the parties to the lis, the issues arising in the case, the submissions urged by the parties, the legal principles applicable to the issues involved and the reasons in support of the findings recorded based on appreciation of evidence on all the material issues arising in the case. [Para 16] [494-E]
3. Neither the Family Court nor the High Court kept in mind these legal principles and passed cryptic and unreasoned orders. Such orders undoubtedly cause prejudice to the parties and in this case, it caused prejudice to the appellant(husband) because the orders of the High Court and Family Court deprived him to know the reasons for fixing the permanent alimony amount of Rs.15,00,000/- payable to his wife. [Para 17] [494-F]
4. The manner in which both the Courts passed the order cannot be countenanced and thus the matter is remanded to the Family Court to decide the quantum of payment of permanent alimony afresh in accordance with law keeping in view the observations made supra. [Paras 18, 19] [494-G; 495-A]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.