HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CGRAM: Hon’ble Shri LM. Qudclusi, & Hon'hie Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ. MA. No. 405 of 2005 APPELLANT Smt. Shanti Shukla. 3‘ Versus RESPONDENT Dwarika Prasad Shukla. Appearance: Shri Satyendra Sahu, counsel for the appellant. Miss Marisa Chhatri, counsel for the respondent. ORAL ORDER ( 22I02I2011 ) Foliowing orél order of the Court was passed by‘ r I. M. Quddusi, J. This appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment and decree dated 08‘“ November, 2004 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Raipur in Civil Case No. 32-N2004 decreeing the suit for divorce filed under Section 13 (1),(‘l-a) & (1-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. (2) The Court framed first issue as tovwhether the appellant was cruel to her husband/respondent which was not proved, however the second issue that whether the appellant was living separately from her husband without any reason from June 1997'and deserted him was decided in favour of the respondent/husband. (3) We have perused the Lower Court Record and also consider the tindings on issue No. 3 on the basis of available on‘record and found that the appellant was not ‘ living with her husband, however the 4- ‘ ‘ husband/respondent was earlier mentally ill but later on he got his treatment and became tit but the appellant did not join him. lt is alleged l that the respondent has become Head Master cf Primary School and his salary has afso been increas. ed (4) We do not find any megamy or impropriety in determination of issue No.2. (5) However, we fee! that the appeiiant has not been granted litigation expenses properly and she has been granted only Rs.2000i— which is too less. With regard to the permanent alimony it has been fixed at Rs.3000/f per month. We do not want to interfere in the same. it will be open for the: appellant to move application before the Court concerned for enhancement of the permanent alimony from Rs.3000l- per month, (6) However, we allow this appeal in part to the extent that the V appellant shall be paid Rs.10,000l— as litigation expenses. Since Rs.2000f- have already been paid Rs.8,000/- now shall be paid by the respondent. (7) The decree shall stand modmed to the above extent. r"l iu/y No order as to costs. sdl-V ‘~ l "M5%:g(:USI 7 SM Prashant Kumar Mishra__