Supreme Court of India
Rakhi Sadhukhan vs Raja Sadhukhan on 29 May, 2025
Author: Vikram Nath
Bench: Vikram Nath, Sanjay Kumar
2025 INSC 789
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10209 OF 2024
RAKHI SADHUKHAN …APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
RAJA SADHUKHAN …RESPONDENT(S)
WITH
CONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. 857 OF 2024
IN
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10209 OF 2024
RAKHI SADHUKHAN …PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
RAJA SADHUKHAN …RESPONDENT(S)
JUDGMENT
VIKRAM NATH, J.
1. The present appeal arises out of the order dated 25.06.2019
passed by the High Court of Calcutta in FA No. 92 of 2019
(FAT No. 122 of 2015), whereby the Division Bench allowed
the respondent-husband’s appeal and granted a decree of
Signature Not Verified
divorce, awarding permanent alimony of Rs. 20,000/- per
Digitally signed by
ANITA MALHOTRA
month to the appellant-wife, with an increase of 5% every
Date: 2025.05.29
17:30:30 IST
Reason:
three years.
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10209 OF 2024 and connected case Page 1 of 6
2. The facts relevant to the present appeal are as follows:
2.1 The appellant-wife and respondent-husband were married
on 18.06.1997.
2.2 A son was born to the them on 05.08.1998.
2.3 In July 2008, the respondent-husband filed Matrimonial
Suit No. 430 of 2008 under Section 27 of the Special
Marriage Act, 1954 seeking dissolution of marriage on the
ground of cruelty allegedly inflicted by the appellant-wife.
2.4 Subsequently, the appellant-wife filed Misc. Case No. 155 of
2008 in the same suit under Section 24 of the Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955, seeking interim maintenance for
herself and the minor son.
2.5 The Trial Court, by order dated 14.01.2010, awarded
interim maintenance of Rs. 8,000/- per month to the
appellant-wife and Rs. 10,000/- towards litigation
expenses.
2.6 The appellant-wife then instituted Misc. Case No. 116 of
2010 under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973. The Trial Court, vide order dated 28.03.2014,
directed the respondent-husband to pay maintenance of
Rs. 8,000/- per month to the appellant-wife and Rs.
6,000/- per month to the minor son, along with Rs. 5,000/-
towards litigation costs.
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10209 OF 2024 and connected case Page 2 of 6
2.7 The Trial Court, vide order dated 10.01.2016, dismissed the
matrimonial suit, finding that the respondent-husband had
failed to prove cruelty. Aggrieved, the respondent filed FAT
No. 122 of 2015 before the High Court of Calcutta.
2.8 During the pendency of the appeal, the appellant-wife filed
CAN No. 4505 of 2025 seeking interim maintenance of Rs.
30,000/- for herself and Rs. 20,000/- for the son, along
with Rs. 50,000/- towards litigation expenses.
2.9 The High Court, by order dated 14.05.2015, directed the
respondent-husband to pay interim maintenance of Rs.
15,000/- per month.
2.10 Subsequently, by order dated 14.07.2016, the High Court
noted that the respondent-husband was drawing a net
monthly salary of Rs. 69,000/- and enhanced the interim
maintenance to Rs. 20,000/- per month.
2.11 Finally, the High Court, by the impugned order dated
25.06.2019, allowed the respondent’s appeal, granted a
decree of divorce on the ground of mental cruelty and
irretrievable breakdown of marriage, and directed the
respondent-husband to:
(i) redeem the mortgage on the flat where the appellant-wife
was residing and transfer the title deed to her name by
31.08.2019;
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10209 OF 2024 and connected case Page 3 of 6
(ii) allow the appellant-wife and their son to continue
residing in the said flat; and
(iii) continue to pay permanent alimony of Rs. 20,000/- per
month to the appellant-wife, subject to a 5% increase
every three years.
Additionally, the High Court directed payment of
educational expenses for the son’s university education and
Rs. 5,000/- per month for private tuition. Aggrieved by the
quantum of alimony awarded, the appellant-wife is before
this Court. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. This Court, vide order dated 20.02.2023, issued notice
confined to the question of enhancement of permanent
alimony awarded to the appellant-wife.
4. By interim order dated 07.11.2023, this Court, noting the
absence of representation on behalf of the respondent-
husband despite proof of service, enhanced the monthly
maintenance to Rs. 75,000/- with effect from 01.11.2023.
The respondent-husband subsequently entered
appearance and filed an application seeking vacation of the
said interim order.
5. The appellant-wife contends that the amount of Rs.
20,000/- per month, which the High Court made final, was
originally awarded as interim maintenance. She submits
that the respondent-husband has a monthly income of
approximately Rs. 4,00,000/- and the quantum of alimony
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10209 OF 2024 and connected case Page 4 of 6
awarded is not commensurate with the standard of living
maintained by the parties during the marriage.
6. In response, the respondent-husband submits that his
current net monthly income is Rs. 1,64,039/-, earned from
his employment at the Institute of Hotel Management,
Taratala, Kolkata. He has placed on record salary slips,
bank statements, and income tax returns for the year
2023–2024. It is further stated that he was earlier employed
with the Taj Hotel, drawing a gross annual salary of Rs.
21,92,525/-. He also submits that his monthly household
expenses total Rs. 1,72,088/-, and that he has remarried,
has a dependent family, and aged parents. The respondent-
husband contends that their son, now 26 years of age, is
no longer financially dependent.
7. Having considered the submissions and materials on
record, we are of the view that the quantum of permanent
alimony fixed by the High Court requires revision. The
respondent-husband’s income, financial disclosures, and
past earnings establish that he is in a position to pay a
higher amount. The appellant-wife, who has remained
unmarried and is living independently, is entitled to a level
of maintenance that is reflective of the standard of living
she enjoyed during the marriage and which reasonably
secures her future. Furthermore, the inflationary cost of
living and her continued reliance on maintenance as the
sole means of financial support necessitate a reassessment
of the amount.
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10209 OF 2024 and connected case Page 5 of 6
8. In our considered opinion, a sum of Rs. 50,000/- per month
would be just, fair and reasonable to ensure financial
stability for the appellant-wife. This amount shall be
subject to an enhancement of 5% every two years. As
regards the son, now aged 26, we are not inclined to direct
any further mandatory financial support. However, it is
open to the respondent-husband to voluntarily assist him
with educational or other reasonable expenses. We clarify
that the son’s right to inheritance remains unaffected, and
any claim to ancestral or other property may be pursued in
accordance with law.
9. In view of the above, the appeal is allowed. The impugned
order of the High Court is modified to the extent that the
permanent alimony payable to the appellant-wife shall be
Rs. 50,000/- per month, subject to a 5% increase every two
years, as noted above.
10. The contempt petition to be disposed of accordingly.
11. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
………………………………..J.
[VIKRAM NATH]
………………………………..J.
[SANDEEP MEHTA]
NEW DELHI;
MAY 29, 2025
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10209 OF 2024 and connected case Page 6 of 6