Calcutta High Court
on 16 August, 2018
(SKB) C.O. 2718 of 2018
Smt. Reetuparna Basu Nee Deb @ Oee @ Oindrila & Anr.
Mr. Partha Pratim Roy … for the petitioner.
The grievance of the petitioner/husband is that the trial court acted without jurisdiction in granting, along with alimony, litigation costs at the rate of Rs.5000/- per month over and above a lumpsum amount of Rs.50,000/-.
It appears from the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the approach of the petitioner’s husband is extremely fair and the husband is willing to pay the alimony and one-time litigation cost of Rs.50,000/- to the wife but only complains against the double jeopardy caused by litigation costs being directed to be paid two-fold.
It is also alleged by the petitioner that alimony was erroneously granted from the date of application in the absence of any allegation as to the husband being guilty of non-payment of maintenance to the wife in the interregnum. Although there is not much substance in the second contention of the petitioner, there is justification in the grievance that litigation costs should not be directed to be paid two-fold by the petitioner.
Accordingly, the petitioner will serve a copy of C.O. 2718 of 2018 on the opposite party no.1 indicating that the matter will appear as the Contested Application in the monthly list of September, 2018. Service on opposite party no.2 is dispensed with. The petitioner will file affidavit of service on the next date of hearing.
There will be an order of stay of operation of the portion of the impugned order whereby the petitioner was directed to pay Rs.5000/- per month as litigation cost, till disposal of the revisional application. It is made clear that there will not be any stay regarding the rest of the impugned order relating to payment of alimony, both current and arrears, as well as the litigation costs of Rs.50,000/-.
(Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.)