Determination of permanent alimony must reflect the wife's accustomed standard of living and long-term inflationary costs.

Facts

The appellant (wife) and respondent (husband) married on 04.02.2019

Source reference: p. 1

The husband filed for divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, alleging non-consummation, mental cruelty, and a false POCSO case filed by the wife’s mother prior to marriage.

Source reference: p. 2

He further alleged the wife had an illicit affair with one Aftab Ansari and attempted to kill him by sprinkling kerosene.

Source reference: p. 3-4

The Family Court, Hazaribagh, granted a decree of divorce on 04.06.2024.

Source reference: p. 1

During the pendency of the First Appeal, the husband solemnized a second marriage.

Source reference: p. 5

Consequently, the wife sought permanent settlement in terms of alimony rather than challenging the dissolution, citing her lack of independent income and dependence on her father.

Source reference: p. 6, 12

Issues

1. Whether the conduct of the parties and the husband's second marriage necessitate the grant of permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955?

Source reference: p. 6 / para. 10

2. What is the just and reasonable quantum of permanent alimony considering the financial status, properties of the husband, and the future needs of the wife?

Source reference: p. 12 / para. 36

Law Applied

The Court primarily applied Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which empowers the court to grant permanent alimony at the time of passing a decree or thereafter, considering the income, property, and conduct of the parties.

Source reference: p. 12-13

It relied on the principles from *Rajnesh v. Neha* (2021) regarding the objective of preventing vagrancy and the requirement for disclosure of assets via affidavit.

Source reference: p. 16-17

It further cited *Vinny Parmvir Parmar v. Parmvir Parmar* (2011) to establish that alimony should enable the wife to maintain a standard of living similar to her matrimonial home

Source reference: p. 15

and *Rakhi Sadhukhan v. Raja Sadhukhan* (2025) regarding the adjustment of alimony for inflation.

Source reference: p. 17-20

Reasoning

The Court analyzed the financial reports submitted by the Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribagh, which revealed that the husband resided in a double-storied building and benefited from a family-run commercial supply business and approximately 30 kathas of land.

Source reference: p. 21 / para. 59

Conversely, the wife was unemployed, possessed no property, and was entirely dependent on her father.

Source reference: p. 21 / para. 58

The Court reasoned that since the husband had already remarried, reconciliation was impossible.

Source reference: p. 22

Applying the "status of parties" test, the Court determined that the alimony must account for the wife's young age (22 years) and a life expectancy of roughly 50 more years, factoring in future inflation.

Source reference: p. 22 / para. 64-66

The Court balanced the husband's new family liabilities against his duty to provide a one-time settlement that ensures the wife does not fall into penury.

Source reference: p. 22 / para. 67

Holding

The Court disposed of the appeal by upholding the dissolution of marriage but modifying the decree to include permanent alimony.

The Court held that a sum of ₹35,00,000 (Rupees Thirty-Five Lakhs) is a just and fair one-time settlement for the wife.

Source reference: p. 22 / para. 67

The respondent-husband was directed to pay this amount in four equal installments over 12 months, with the first installment due within one month of the order.

Source reference: p. 23 / para. 68

The wife was granted liberty to approach the court if the payments are not credited as directed.

Source reference: p. 23 / para. 69