Calcutta High Court
CO/3274/2026 of PINAKI ROY CHOWDHURY Vs JAYEETA ROY CHOWDHURY on 21 September 2026
Court No.6 BP C.O. 3274 of 2026 Pinaki Roy Chowdhury -versus- Jayeeta Roy Chowdhury Mr. Debashis Banerjee Mr. Shuvanil Chakraborty Mr. Rakesh Jana .. for the petitioner This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the husband and is directed
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Sl.30 21.09.2026 Court No.6 BP C.O. 3274 of 2026
Pinaki Roy Chowdhury -versus- Jayeeta Roy Chowdhury
Mr. Debashis Banerjee Mr. Shuvanil Chakraborty Mr. Rakesh Jana .. for the petitioner
This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is at the instance of the husband and is directed against an order being no.19 dated November 18, 2025 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Ranaghat, Nadia in Misc. Case No. 5 of 2024. By the order impugned the application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act filed by the opposite party was allowed by directing the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 15,000/- per month for the wife and Rs. 5,000/- per month for the minor son. The learned trial judge noted that the petitioner is an employee of the Eastern Railway and his salary is around Rs. 70,000/- per month and the wife/opposite party has no independent income of her own. The affidavit of assets and liabilities have been filed by the respective parties and the learned trial judge after taking into consideration the materials that were placed on record arrived at a finding that a consolidated sum of Rs. 15,000/- per month for the wife and a further sum of Rs.
2 5,000/- per month for the minor son would be sufficient in view of the present cost of living index. The learned trial judge applied the correct legal tests for fixing the alimony pendente lite. This Court is not inclined to interfere with such order under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly C.O. 3274 of 2026 stands disposed of. There shall be, however, no order as to costs. Urgent certified photocopy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties expeditiously on compliance of usual legal formalities.
(Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)