Patna High Court
Family LawCivil Law

₹50 lakh permanent alimony ordered after court-ordered probe finds husband’s mortgaged property valued at ₹4 crore

Mrs. Sweta Dcruz vs Vinod Joseph Sebestian

Patna High CourtJUDGMENT: October 05, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
₹50 lakh permanent alimony ordered after court-ordered probe finds husband’s mortgaged property valued at ₹4 crore. Mrs. Sweta Dcruz vs Vinod Joseph Sebestian. Patna High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The parties, who are Christians, married on 24 January 2010.

Source reference: para. 2–5

The wife alleged cruelty and an improper relationship between her husband and his long-standing domestic worker; she left the matrimonial home on 10 March 2010 and returned to her parental home in Bilaspur.

Source reference: para. 2–5

The husband denied the allegations.

Source reference: para. 2–5

The Family Court dismissed her divorce petition, treating it as one under Section 10(1) of the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872.

Source reference: para. 2–5

On appeal, the High Court found that adultery had not been proved, but that the wife had lived separately since 2010 and had filed the matrimonial case in 2014.

Source reference: para. 11

The parties also filed affidavits of assets and liabilities, and the Court appointed a Special Officer to verify the husband’s assets and income.

Source reference: para. 15–17
02

Issues

1. Whether the Family Court applied the correct statute in determining a Christian couple’s divorce petition.

Source reference: para. 6–7

2. Whether the wife was entitled to a divorce on the ground of desertion, despite the failure to prove her allegation of adultery.

Source reference: para. 10–14

3. Whether, and in what amount, the wife was entitled to permanent alimony.

Source reference: para. 15–19
03

Law Applied

The Court stated that the Indian Divorce Act, 1869—not the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872—governs dissolution of marriage between Christian parties in India.

Source reference: para. 6

Under Section 10(1)(ix) of the Divorce Act, desertion for at least two years immediately preceding presentation of the petition is a ground for dissolution.

Source reference: no citation
04

Reasoning

The Court held that the Family Court had erred by deciding the petition under the wrong statute.

Source reference: para. 6–7

Although the wife did not establish adultery, the Court found that she had left the matrimonial home in March 2010 and that the divorce case was filed in 2014; it therefore concluded that the statutory period of desertion had been satisfied.

Source reference: para. 11

For alimony, it considered the wife’s stated monthly expenses and dependence on her parental home, the husband’s disclosed income and rental receipts, and the Special Officer’s findings concerning his property and other assets.

Source reference: para. 15–18

On that basis, it fixed permanent alimony at Rs. 50,00,000.

Source reference: para. 18–19
05

Holding

The High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the Family Court’s dismissal, and granted the wife a decree of divorce effective from the date of judgment.

It directed the husband to pay Rs. 50,00,000 as permanent alimony within three months.

Source reference: para. 19

Upon payment, he would no longer be required to pay maintenance, and pending cases between the parties arising from their matrimonial relationship were directed to be dropped.

Source reference: para. 19
06

Acts & Sections Cited

1 provisions across 1 statute referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.

Indian Christian Marriage Act, 18721

Patna High Court

Original Court PDF

Mrs. Sweta DcruzvsVinod Joseph Sebestian

Patna High Court · October 05, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment