Patna High Court
Amar Nath Bharti @ Akali RaiversusSabita Devi
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
Holding
The appellate court upheld the trial court’s award of Rs 10 lakh as permanent alimony, finding no ground for interference.
Summary
The appellant, Amar Nath Bharti, appealed against a trial court order granting his wife Rs 10 lakh as permanent alimony following a divorce on the ground of cruelty. The appellant argued that the court failed to properly consider his actual earnings, citing his daily wage of Rs 480 under the Minimum Wages Act, and contended that his wife’s alleged adultery should preclude alimony. The trial court had rejected the adultery allegation and fixed the alimony based on the appellant’s stated monthly income of Rs 10,000‑12,000. The appellate bench applied the Supreme Court’s guideline in Rajnesh v. Neha (2021 2 SSC 324) and held that the appellant was liable to pay Rs 10,36,800, finding the trial court’s award of Rs 10 lakh not excessive. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, with the court granting the appellant six months to make payment and allowing the respondent to enforce the decree thereafter.
Issues considered
- Whether the trial court erred in fixing the amount of permanent alimony awarded to the wife.
- How the appellant's income should be calculated for alimony purposes, including the relevance of the Minimum Wages Act.
- Whether the allegation of adultery by the wife bars or reduces the entitlement to permanent alimony.
- Applicability of the Supreme Court guideline in Rajnesh v. Neha for calculating permanent alimony.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- alimony
- permanent alimony
- divorce
- cruelty
- adultery
- maintenance calculation
- Minimum Wages Act
- family law
- appellate review
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Appeal No.115 of 2021
======================================================
Amar Nath Bharti @ Akali Rai Daughter of Arvind Mandal, Resident of
Village-Basbitta, Police Station- Dhoraiya, District-Banka
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. Sabita Devi Wife of Amar Nath Bharti @ Akali Rai Daughter of Arvind
Mandal, Resident of Village-Basbitta, Police Station-Dhoraiya, District-
Banka.
2. Rajhans Kumar Son of Late Bahadur Mandal, Resident of Village-Basbitta,
Police Station-Dhoraiya, District-Banka.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Dr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Kshem Sharma, Advocate
Ms. Sweety Sinha, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Brij Nandad Prasad, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI)
18 26-02-2026 This is an appeal filed by the husband/appellant
against the respondents.
2. Learned Advocate on behalf of the appellant and
the respondent are present.
3. It is submitted by Dr. Manoj Kumar, learned
Advocate on behalf of the appellant that the Trial Court did not
consider the one time alimony properly because of the fact that
the petitioner is a day labourer and his daily income is only Rs.
480/- as per the rate of Minimum Wages Act.
4. In the affidavit of assets and liabilities, the
Patna High Court MA No.115 of 2021(18) dt.26-02-2026
2/4
appellant has stated his monthly income as Rs. 10,000/- to Rs.
12,000/-. Now, if we consider the daily income of the appellant
@ Rs. 480/-, as per Minimum Wages Act, his monthly income
comes to Rs. 14,400/- (Rupees Fourteen Thousand Four
Hundred). One third of 14,400-/ is 4,800 which the respondent
no. 1 is entitled as alimony per month, when the per month
alimony multiplied by 12, it would become Rs. 57,600/-
(Rupees Fifty Seven Thousand Six Hundred) per anum. In case
of permanent alimony, the said amount is to be multiplied by 18
years i.e. still attainment of 60 years of the respondent, then it
comes to Rs. 10,36,800/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs Thirty Six
Thousand Eight Hundred).
5. If the monthly salary of the appellant is held as per
the affidavit of asset @ of Rs. 12,000/- then the respondent no. 1
is entitled to get Rs. 36,000/- per anum. In such case the
permanent alimony will be 6,48,000/- (Rs. Six Lakhs Forty
Eight Thousand).
6. The learned Trial Court granted Rs. 10 lakhs
towards permanent alimony to be paid by the appellant to
respondent no. 1.
7. Learned Advocate on behalf of the appellant
submits that he is not in a position to pay the said amount
Patna High Court MA No.115 of 2021(18) dt.26-02-2026
3/4
because of the fact that the respondent no. 1 is living in adultery.
In a most unparliamentary way, he submits in open Court,
within the hearing of this Court as well as the learned Advocates
amongst whom number of lady Advocates are present, that the
appellant is not obliged to pay any permanent alimony to a lady
who has fled away with respondent no. 2 to lead adulterous life.
When the Trial Court disbelieved the allegation of adultery as a
ground of divorce and granted divorce in favour of the appellant
only on the ground of cruelty and the instant appeal is filed
challenging the amount of permanent alimony to be paid by the
appellant to his wife, making such aspersion in an open Court
without having any substance in record is not only derogatory to
the respondent no. 1 but also to the women folk in general.
8. Learned Advocate on behalf of the appellant is
cautioned on his submission in future.
9. Since the appellant has filed document about his
income as per monthly wages @ Rs. 480/- per day and on
calculation in accordance with the guideline made by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rajnesh vs. Neha reported in 2021 2
SSC 324, we have come to a conclusion that the appellant was
under obligation to pay Rs. 10,36,800/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs
Thirty Six Thousand and Eight Hundred) and the Trial Court
Patna High Court MA No.115 of 2021(18) dt.26-02-2026
4/4
granted a sum of Rs. 10 lakhs only towards permanent alimony,
we do not find any reason for interference in the instant appeal.
10. However, to enable the appellant to make payment
of such amount, six months time is granted to him, failing
which, the respondent no. 1 is at liberty to recover the said
amount by putting the decree passed by Trial Court in
execution.
11. With the above order, the instant appeal is disposed
of.
(Bibek Chaudhuri, J)
( Dr. Anshuman, J)
Jyoti Kumari/-
U
Checking your session…