Mat.App. 7/2006 BEFORE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MADAN B. LOKUR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MUTUM B.K. SINGH The appellant is aggrieved by an order dated 28.2.2006 passed by the District Ju dge, Sivasagar in Misc. Matrimonial Case No.56/2005. By the order under appeal, the appellant has been asked to pay permanent alimony of ‘ 3 lakhs to the respondent-wife. It is stated by learned counsel for the appellant that an amount of ‘1.50 lakhs has already been paid to the respondent-wife and the matter should be closed on the ground that the amount awarded by the District Judge is exorbitant. It is su bmitted by learned counsel for the appellant that his client has to look after t wo children and that the respondent-wife is also earning. We have seen the salary slip of the appellant produced by learned counsel. It ap pears that the appellant is working as an Executive Engineer (Drilling) with the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. According to the salary slip, the basic pa y of the appellant is ‘17,880/- and he is also entitled to several types of allo wances. Some deductions are made from the total income of the appellant and the principal amounts deducted are towards GPF contribution and income tax payable. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the monthly earning of his client is about ‘41,000/- and a total deduction of about ‘25,000/- is made every month. It is submitted that the take-home salary of the appellant is about ‘16,000/- pe r month and this is insufficient for his day-to-day expenses and if he is asked to pay a further amount of ‘1.50 lakhs to the respondent-wife, it will be diffic ult for the appellant to survive. We find that the deductions also include re-payment of loans taken by the appell ant from his employer. In our opinion, refund of loans taken by the appellant ca nnot be used as an excuse for denying permanent alimony to the respondent-wife. The appellant has taken loans for investment in housing and this will give prote ction for the future. Under these circumstances, we are of the view that the status and position of th e appellant as well as his income clearly suggest that the payment of permanent alimony of ‘3 lakhs is not unreasonable. Given time, the appellant can certainly make the payment considering that he has not made further payment to the respon dent-wife for the last several years. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal, but grant time to the appellant to pay the b alance amount of permanent alimony i.e., ‘1.50 lakhs to the respondent-wife on o r before 31.12.2011. The Trial Court records be sent back immediately. A copy of this order be sent to the respondent-wife by the Registry.