Simultaneously, with the surrender of possession, the husband will pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/ by account payee cheque of any nationalised bank in the name of the wife to be handed over to the learned Advocate for the appellant and will pay the balance amount of Rs.2,00,000/ by March, 2009.
The decree for divorce is, thus, affirmed with the aforesaid additional direction as regards permanent alimony.
Temporary injunction with ad interim order in terms of prayer b above Commission Costs of the suit Any other relief or reliefs as the Ld.
3.3 Admittedly, the defendant was a joint owner of the said premises along with his two brothers.
For a decree permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men, agents and associated from causing any obstruction towards free ingress and egress of the plaintiffs, for use and occupation of the suit flat at 5, Netai Babu Lane, Kolkata 700 012, in any manner prejudicial to the interst of the plaintiffs.
Being aggrieved, she preferred an appeal before the High Court which, in turn, was pleased to pass the following order In the facts of the present case, we are of the view that a sum of Rs.4,00,000/ should be paid by the husband to the wife provided the wife hands over the vacant possession of the rooms over which she has already filed a suit in the City Civil Court to the husband within a month from today.
The High Court set aside the order passed by the Trial Court refusing such prayer.
In the wake of the above, an application for rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11 a of the Code of Civil Procedure was filed by the defendant husband father and it was stated that the remaining plaintiff had numbercause of action to institute the suit against the defendant and that the plaint does number disclose any cause of action.
If the first instalment of Rs.2,00,000/ is paid, from that moment, the husband will pay the monthly alimony at the rate of Rs.2,500/ instead of the existing alimony of Rs.5,000/ .
After hearing the parties, the City Civil Court at Calcutta was pleased to reject the said application on 13th December, 2010.
Court may deem fit and proper 3.2 The said suit was filed on the facts stated in the plaint that plaintiff No.
The facts of the case, briefly, are as follows 3.1 A suit was filed for declaration and injunction by the appellant along with Smt.
On December 17, 1993 the said property was partitioned between them and the portions were demarcated between the two brothers.
Subsequently, the eldest brother gifted his 1/3rd share in the said premises to his two brothers, and thereby the defendant and one of his brothers became the owners of the said premises in equal shares.
Ashima Sen, mother of the present appellant.
Admittedly, the mother and son resided in the two rooms in the first floor of the premises No.5, Netai Babu Lane, Kolkata 700 012, being the matrimonial home of plaintiff No.
Being aggrieved, this appeal has been filed on the ground that the said property is a trust property and that the appellant has a right to reside there as one of the trustees, and that he as a legal heir and son of the respondent, is entitled to reside in the suit property in terms of the trust deed.
The moment the balance amount of Rs.2,00,000/ will be paid, the husband will number be required to pay any further monthly sum as alimony.
In these circumstances, in accordance with the said order the wife duly gave effect to the order of the High Court and filed an application before the City Civil Court, Calcutta, for deletion of her name as the plaintiff No.1 from the said suit.
Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said order, a revision petition was filed against the said order by Subhas Chandra Sil, being the defendant in the said suit before the High Court.
The defendant filed a suit for dissolution of marriage in the City Civil Court at Calcutta which was transferred before the Family Court and on 15th July, 1998 a decree for dissolution of marriage was passed by the Family Court against plaintiff No.1.
1 Smt.
Out of the said wedlock, plaintiff No.2 Soumik Sil was born on 20th April, 1989.
Sen and the defendant Subhas Chandra Sil were married on 2nd June, 1986.
If the wife fails to deliver vacant possession of the rooms mentioned above within a month from today, this part of the order granting permanent alimony will stand recalled and the wife would be free to initiate fresh proceedings for fixation of permanent alimony on the basis of the then income of the husband after taking into companysideration the companyduct of the wife as provided in Section 25 of the Act.
The appellant herein and plaintiff No.1 the mother filed a suit being Title Suit being No.2430 of 2007 before the City Civil Court at Calcutta, and the following reliefs were prayed for in the said suit For a decree for declaration that the defendant, his men and agents have numberright to obstruct the user of the suit flat by the plaintiffs by any means prejudicial to the interest of the plaintiffs.
Pinaki Chandra Ghose, J. Leave granted.
This appeal is directed against an order passed by the High Court dated February 10, 2011 whereby the application filed by the respondent herein under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure for short the Code was allowed and the plaint was rejected.
