Trishita Das Halder v. Rupak Das

28.11.2025 SL No.12 Court No.6 (gc) CO 4023 of 2025 Smt. Trishita Das Halder Vs.

Sri Rupak Das Mr. Tanmay Mukherjee, Mr. Souvik Das, Mr. Tapas Chatterjee ...for the Petitioner.

Mr. Sounak Bhattacharya, Mr. Neil Basu, Mr. Sankha Biswas ...for the Opposite Party.

1.

The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated September 10, 2025 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court - III at Alipore, District - 24 Parganas (South) in Matrimonial Suit No.3142 of 2018. By the order impugned, the learned Court refused to enhance the maintenance awarded earlier.

The husband/opposite party was directed to pay Rs.16,000/- per month as alimony pendente lite towards the monthly expenses of the minor child. 2.

It is submitted fairly by Mr. Bhattacharya, learned Advocate appearing for the opposite party/husband that the husband is not inclined to proceed with the civil revision, being CO 87 of 2023. The petitioner had claimed enhancement on the ground that the son is an internationally acclaimed chess player and has to participate in

competitions all over the world. Due to paucity of funds, he could not participate in the World Cup in 2025.

He also takes training from Viswanathan Anand. Thus, the accumulated expenses for the son to pursue chess and take coaching for the tournaments is excessive and the mother is not in a position to bear such expenses. 3.

Mr.

Tanmay Mukherjee, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the only reason why the application was filed, was to keep a continuity in the child's future participation in the tournaments.

4.

Mr. Bhattacharya submits that the enhanced rate as directed by the Court is already being paid. Further enhancement was unwarranted. The circumstances did not change, which would entail the wife to ask for an increase.

5.

I have considered the rival contentions of the parties. The fact that the child is a good chess player is available from the records. The order impugned is modified.

6.

The opposite party is directed to transfer a sum of Rs.4.5 lakhs to the petitioner's account, either by RTGS or any other mode or by tendering cheques, to meet the expenses of the child that shall be incurred towards the tournaments and training, upto May, 2027, in two equal instalments.

7.

The first instalment shall be paid within 15th January, 2026 and the second instalment shall be paid within 15th March, 2026. The order impugned is accordingly modified. The monthly maintenance pendent lite shall also be paid.

8.

The revisional application is, accordingly, disposed of.

9.

There shall be no order as to costs.

10.

Parties are to act on the server copy of this order. (Shampa Sarkar, J.)