Orissa High CourtNiruparani Acharya vs Harmohan Panigrahi on 20 July, 2022Bench:S. Talapatra,M.S. SahooIN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK\n\n                             MATA No.50 of 2016\n\n     Niruparani Acharya                   .........               Appellant\n                                                          Mr. P.K. Panda, Adv.\n\n                                      -Versus-\n\n\n     Harmohan Panigrahi                 ..........               Respondent\n                                                          Mr. J. Samantaray. Adv.\n\n                                    CORAM:\n                                    JUSTICE S. TALAPATRA\n                                    JUSTICE M.S. SAHOO\n\n                                           ORDER20.07.2022\nOrder No.14.          1.      This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement\n               (Virtual/Physical Mode).2.      Mr. P.K. Panda, learned counsel appears for the appellant.3.      Mr. J. Samantaray, learned counsel appears for the\n               respondent.4.      This appeal is directed against the Judgment dated 30.03.2016\n               delivered in C.P. No.292 of 2013, by the Judge Family Court,\n               Berhampur. Indisputably, no alimony has been provided for the\n               appellant-wife while passing the decree of divorce.5.      It may be noted, at the threshold, that there is no challenge\n               against the decree of divorce.6.      Learned counsel for the appellant has clearly submitted in\n               response to our query that no application underSection 25 (1)of the\n               Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 had been filed by the appellant, seeking\n               alimony or maintenance.27.     Mr. J. Samantaray, learned counsel appearing for the\nrespondent has claimed that the only ground taken in this appeal is\nthat, one memo, filed on the date of argument, was not taken into\nconsideration by the Judge, Family Court. In the said memo,\nadmittedly, the appellant informed the Court that she had resigned\nfrom the service.8.     It thus clearly emerges that there was no consideration in\nrespect of granting alimony by the Judge, Family Court as there no\nprayer for exercising power for granting alimony underSection 25 (1)of the Hindu Marriage Act.9.Section 25of the Hindu Marriage Act itself provides that\nalimony or maintenance can be provided by the Judge who passes the\ndecree of divorce but on application made by the party.10.    For purpose of reference, the relevant part of theSection 25of\nthe Hindu Marriage Act is reproduced hereunder:Any Court exercising jurisdiction under this Act\n       may, at the time of passing any decree or at any time\n       subsequent thereto, on application made to it for the\n       purpose by either the wife or the husband, as the case\n       may be, order that the respondent shall pay to the\n       applicant for her or his maintenance and support such\n       gross sum or such monthly or periodical sum for a term\n       not exceeding the life of the applicant as, having regard\n       to the respondents own income and other property, if\n       any, the income and other property of the applicant\n       [,the conduct of the parties and other circumstances of\n       the case], it may seem to the Court to be just, and any\n       such payment may be secured, if necessary, by a\n       charge on the immovable property of the respondent.311.        It is apparent fromSection 25 (1)that such order of\n              maintenance or alimony can only be passed. On application, made to\n              the Court for the said purpose either by the wife or the husband, as the\n              case may be. It can be ordered that the respondent shall pay to the\n              applicant for her or his maintenance and support by such gross sum or\n              such monthly or periodical sum for a term not exceeding the life of\n              the applicant having due regard to the respondent's own income and\n              other property, if any.12.        Even the conduct of the parties and other circumstances of the\n              case may be examined by the concerned Court, for the purpose of\n              passing such order.13.Section 25 (1)postulates that such application, as referred\n              before, can be made at the time of passing of the decree or at any time\n              subsequent thereto. As such, we are of the view that appeal is not the\n              appropriate recourse for passing the order underSection 25 (1)of the\n              Hindu Marriage Act.14.        The competent Court has to inquire into the various aspects,\n              viz. income of the parties, standard of life and also the conduct of the\n              parties.15.        As such, the appeal stands dismissed, however, reserving the\n              liberty in favour of the appellant to approach the Family Court underSection 25 (1)of the Hindu Marriage Act for alimony or maintenance,\n              at the option of the appellant.16.        Draw the decree accordingly.(S. Talapatra)\n                                                                  Judge\n\n\n                                                              (M.S. Sahoo)\nRati Ranjan                                                      Judge45