Tripura High Court
Mat.App./6/2023 of SMT. BAPI DAS, Vs SRI KESHAB DAS, on 8 January 2025
OF TRIPURA AGARTALA Mat.App 06 of 2023 Smt. Bapi Das --- Appellant(s) Versus Sri Keshab Das --- Respondent(s) For Appellant (s) : Mr. S. Nandy, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. S. Bhattacharjee, Advocate. Mr. K. Nath, Advocate. Date of hearing and date of Judgment and order : 08.01.2025
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA IA NO.01 OF 2025 IN MAT.APP. NO.6 OF 2023
HON’BLE JUSTICE DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BISWAJIT PALIT
Present:
For the Applicant(s) : Ms. S. Nandy, Advocate. For the Respondent(s)
: Mr. P. Roy Barman, Sr. Advocate. Mr. S. Bhattacharjee, Advocate. Mr. K. Nath, Advocate. Ms. A. Debbarma, Advocate.
13.08.2025
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.
Order
1. This present application has arisen out of Mat Appeal No. 6 of 2023, which was disposed of by this Court on 08.01.2025. The applicant seeks a direction to the respondent-husband for the return of gift items.
2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.
3. Ms. S. Nandy, learned counsel appearing for the applicant, urged this Court to direct the respondent to return the items that were gifted to him during the course of his marriage with the appellant. It is submitted that failure to return these items would result in serious prejudice to the appellant and cause irreparable monetary loss. 4. On the other hand, Mr. S. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel appearing for the respondent, submits that his client has already paid the entire alimony amount as directed. He further contends that the present issues raised in this application were neither framed as issues nor supported by any evidence in the earlier proceeding.
5. Upon hearing the parties and on perusal of the records, it is evident that the relief now sought by the applicant was neither a subject matter of the original proceedings nor was any evidence led or issue framed regarding the return of gift items. The matter is now being raised directly before this Court in appellate jurisdiction, without the factual foundation required for such a determination. In absence of any adjudication on this point at the trial stage, this Court finds no basis to grant the relief sought.
6. Accordingly, the present application stands dismissed.
B. PALIT, J
DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD, J
suhanjit
SABYASACDigitally signed by SABYASACHI GHOSH HI GHOSHDate: 2025.08.14 16:42:44 +05'30'