IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MA No.460 of 2009 MANOJ KUMAR VERMA Son of late Lallan Prasad, resident of Goraiya Patti, Police Station :- Bagaha, District :- West Champaran.. -Applicant/ Appellant. Versus Smt. Nisha Shrivastava Daughter of late Yogendra Prasad Shrivastava, resident of Raj Kutchari Narainapur, P.S. :- Ram Nagar, District :- West Champaran… ….Opposite Party /Respondent For the Appellant: Mr. Mahesh Narayan Parbat, Advocate For the Respondent :Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma,Advocate ----------- 8 02.12.2010 Heard the parties in respect of the limitation petition (I.A. No. 4332 of 2009). In the facts and circumstances of the case, the delay of ten months in preferring this appeal is hereby condoned and I.A. No. 4332 of 2009 stands allowed. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent-wife. The appellant prayed for divorce through Divorce Case No. 54 of 2003/237 of 2005 making allegation of desertion by his wife. The marriage was solemnized on 30.05.1996 and the circumstances disclosed that relationship between the parties was acrimonious. After considering the materials and evidence on record, the learned Family Court without giving any specific finding on desertion simply held 2 that “analysing the entire facts, the marriage solemnized on 30.05.1996 between Manoj Kumar Verma and his wife, Nisha Shrivastav is hereby dissolved.” The respondent-wife had claimed in her written statement that her ornaments and other belongings were never returned to her and that her husband is liable. Letters contained in Annexures A, B and C were perused by the learned Family Court and in paragraph 12 he has given a finding that those letters confirm her claim. Again in paragraph 14 he has recorded that there is an aroma of realism about the ornaments of the wife being taken away from her. In that view of the matter, while granting permanent alimony only of Rs. 50,000/(Rupees Fifty Thousand) to the wife, the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Bettiah, directed the appellant-husband to pay rupees one lac for the ornaments and other belongings of the respondent-wife. The wife has accepted the order for dissolution of marriage as well as meagre amount of alimony, probably considering the entire judgment and order in totality. The appellant is aggrieved on account of order for 3 payment of rupees one lac for the ornaments and belongings to the respondent-wife. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that such an order is impermissible and is beyond the scope of jurisdiction of the Family Court in a divorce proceeding. The submission is found to be without any substance. The Family Court is not shackled by strict rule of evidence or pleadings and even the evidence is recorded summarily. It is expected to resolve the dispute amongst the family members in a most proper and just manner. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that the amount of permanent alimony granted by the Family Court is quite meagre and in totality even the amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- will hardly be sufficient for her maintenance on permanent basis. In the facts and circumstances of the case, no good ground is made out to interfere with the judgment and decree passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bettiah. This appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. No costs. SC (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)