Interim Order 1

Order Details: Copy of Judgment
Pdf Text: Judgment ~1~ C. C. NO.21/DV/2021
CNR No.MHMM18-000626-2021 Filed on : 22/01/2021.
Registered on : 21/01/2021.
Decided on : 03/06/2025.
Duration : 04 Y., 04 M., 12 D.
Exh. : 10
IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, (FIRST CLASS),
71ST COURT, BANDRA, MUMBAI.
(PRESIDED OVER BY SHRI. ATUL B. JADHAV)
C. C. No.21/DV/2021
Archana Rajkumar Gupta.
Age: 28, Occupation : Housewife.
Address: Room No.144,
Indira Nagar, Kishor Kumar Ganguly
Marg, Santacruz (W), Mumbai-400054. …. Applicant.
V/s.
1 Rajkumar Umashankar Gupta.
Age: Adult, Occupation : Shopkeeper.
Address: Plot No. 164 Narsala Road,
Near Water Tank, Ambika Nagar,
Nagpur-440034.
2 Sweety Shaw Rajkumar Gupta.
Age: Adult, Occupation : NIL.
Address: Plot No. 164 Narsala Road,
Near Water Tank, Ambika Nagar,
Nagpur-440034.
3 Pradeep Kumar Gupta.
Age: Adult, Occupation : NIL.
Address: Aarey Sarita Stall,
Opp National College, Linking Road,
Bandra (W), Mumbai-400050. …. Respondents.
-- 1 of 9 --
Judgment ~2~ C. C. NO.21/DV/2021
Appearance : Learned Advocate Shri Raees Uddin Khan for the
applicant.
: Proceeding exparte against respondent No.1.
J u d g m e n t D a t e :-03/06/2025
The applicant has filed the present proceeding under the
provisions of The Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act,
2005 (here-in-after referred as, 'the PWDV Act') against respondents.
2. The applicant’s case in nutshell as under,
The respondent No.1 is her husband and respondent No.2
is second wife of respondent No.1 and respondent No.3 is cousin
brother of respondent No.1. It is contended that, her marriage with
respondent No.1 taken place on 30/04/2012, in Uttar Pradesh. They
have two children out of the said wedlock by name Prince, who born on
23/07/2013 and Ardhya, who born on 17/10/2015. After marriage the
application came to Mumbai at her matrimonial home. The respondent
No.1 was having PAN shop. After some days the applicant went to her
parental home. The respondent No.1 used to angry upon the applicant
when she did not make phone call during shop timing. The applicant
returned to Mumbai but the respondent started to avoid her. In the year
2014 the family of the respondent shifted to Nagpur and started
General Store. The applicant was forced to seat at shop. The respondent
No.1 quarreling with her, when the applicant denied to seat in the shop.
Then the respondent No.1 assaulted and abused her.
3. It is contended that, the respondent No.1 is having affair
with respondent No.2. When the applicant came across about the said
affair and when she asked about the same to the respondent No.1, at
that time, he assaulted and abused the applicant. It is further contended
-- 2 of 9 --
Judgment ~3~ C. C. NO.21/DV/2021
that, the respondent No.1 had mortgaged jewelry of applicant and
taken loan of I.One Lakh in the name of applicant and also taken loan
of I.Two Lakhs in the joint name. The respondent No.1 neither returned
single penny nor jewelry fo the applicant.
4. It is further contended that, the respondent No.1 did not
provide any medical assistance to the applicant and her children. Even
the respondent No.1 did not used to run his business properly. The
respondent No.1 started to reside separately in another room. It is further
contended that, upon asking about his affair, the respondent No.1 was
become angry and took his cheque book and cloths and left the company of
applicant. Therefore, the applicant called her in-laws, who brought her and
her children to Mumbai. It is contended that, the respondent demanded
divorce but the applicant denied the same and upon denial the respondent
No.1 abused and assaulted the applicant.
5. Further, it is contended that, the respondent No.1 beaten the
applicant, as she belongs to poor family and failed to bring dowry from her
mother. Thus, according to the applicant she is subjected to domestic
violence at the hands of respondent. Therefore, the applicant
constrained to file the present proceeding and prayed that, respondents
be directed not to harass her in any manner by passing protection order.
The applicant also sought relief of I.5,000/- p.m., as rent from the
respondent No.1 and also sought relief of maintenance for her and her
children to the tune of I.20,000/- p.m. from the respondent No.1. Also
the applicant claimed the compensation of I.30,00,000/- from
respondent.
6. The respondent No.1 and No.2 failed to submit their
written statements, therefore, the proceeding proceeded without their
reply.
-- 3 of 9 --
Judgment ~4~ C. C. NO.21/DV/2021
7. Considering the rival contentions of the applicant following
points are arises for determination. I have recorded my findings thereon
for the reasons, as under :-
Sr. No. Points Findings
1. Does the applicant proved that, she
has been subjected domestic
violence at the hands of
respondents ? Partly Affirmative.
2. Is applicant entitled for relief of
Protection Order, as she prayed? Partly Affirmative.
3 Is applicant entitled for rent amount
from the respondent No.1 ? Negative.
4 Is applicant entitled for
maintenance, as prayed, from the
respondent No.1 ?
Partly Affirmative.
5 Is applicant entitled for
compensation, as prayed, from the
respondent No.1 ?
Partly Affirmative.
6. What order? Application is
partly allowed.
-- 4 of 9 --
Judgment ~5~ C. C. NO.21/DV/2021
REASONS
8. The applicant in order to substantiate her claim she relied
on her own evidence, which is at (Exh.-7). The applicant has closed her
evidence by filing pursis (Exh.-8).
9. The proceeding proceeded against respondents No.1 and
No.2. There is no evidence adduced by the respondents
.
10. I have heard elaborated arguments of Ld. Advocate Shri
Raees Uddin Khan for the applicant and also considered written notes
of arguments (Exh.-9) filed by Ld. Advocate for applicant.
AS TO POINT NO.1 :-
11. In order to grant relief in favour of the applicant under the
provision of Domestic Violence Act, the applicant has to prove that, she
has been subjected domestic violence at the hands of respondents. The
applicant in her evidence at (Exh.-7) reiterated her contentions made in
the application. According to the applicant the respondent No.1 is her
husband and out of their wedlock she has two children by name Prince
and Ardhya. Further, the applicant deposed that, the respondent No.1 is
having extra marital affairs with the respondent No.2. Latter on,
according to the applicant the respondent No.1 married with the
respondent No.2.
12. It is further contended that, when the applicant come
across about the affairs of respondent No.1 and No.2, she asked about
the same but the respondent No.1 abused and assaulted her. It has
further come in her evidence that, they shifted at Nagpur. The
respondent No.1 is having General Store shop and he used to force the
applicant to seat in the shop and upon denial by the applicant the
respondent No.1 used to beat her.
-- 5 of 9 --
Judgment ~6~ C. C. NO.21/DV/2021
13. Further, it come in the evidence of applicant that, the
respondent No.1 left the company of applicant and her children. The
respondent No.1 has not provided any means of maintenance and nor
provided any medical assistance to them. The respondent No.1
demanded divorce with the applicant and upon denial by her, he beaten
her.
14. It is to be noted that, the proceeding is proceeded without
reply of respondents No.1 and No.2. The evidence adduced by the
applicant on oath, not challenged by the respondent therefore, there is
no reason to disbelieve her evidence. It is also not denied by the
respondent No.1 and No.2 by filing their reply that they have extra
marital affairs and marriage of respondent No.1 with respondent No.2
is his second marriage. Even there is no evidence adduced by
respondents and denied the story putforth by the applicant.
15. From the evidence of the applicant it reveals that, due to
due to extra marital affairs of respondent No.1 with respondent No.2 he
has left the company of the applicant and children. It seems that, the
respondent No.1 denied the marital status and conjugal rights of the
applicant, which amounts to domestic violence. The evidence of the
applicant on the point of assault and abusive language used by the
respondent No.1, is remained unchallenged. No material placed on
record by the respondents to disbelieve the said version of applicant.
Therefore, I hold that, the applicant is subjected domestic violence at
the hands of respondent No.1. Hence, I record my finding to point No.1,
as in the partly affirmative only against respondent No.1.
AS TO POINT NO.2 :-
16. This point is in respect of the protection order sought by
the applicant against the respondents. The applicant is wife of
-- 6 of 9 --
Judgment ~7~ C. C. NO.21/DV/2021
respondent No.1. There is domestic relationship between them. The
respondent No.1 is denying conjugal rights of the applicant by leaving
her company. The respondent No.1 demanded divorce and on that
count he assaulted and abused the applicant. The said evidence of the
applicant remains unchallenged, therefore, there is no reason to
disbelieve the version of applicant. In order to protect the interest, life
and limb of the applicant, I am opinion that, the applicant is aggrieved
person and in future there is every possibility of domestic violence at
the hands of respondents. Therefore, protection order directing to
respondent No.1 that, he shall not cause any kind of domestic violence
to applicant can be passed. Therefore, I record my findings to point
No.2, as in the partly affirmative against respondent No.1.
AS TO POINT NO.3 :-
17. This point is in respect of rent in lieu of accommodation
sought by the applicant against the respondent No.1. The applicant
prayed the rent in lieu of accommodation to the tune of I.5,000/- p.m.
from the respondent No.1. It is to be noted that, the applicant has given
her address in the title cause of the petition i.e.Room No.144 Indira
Nagar, Kishor Kumar Ganguly Marg, Santacruz (W), Mumbai-400054. It
appears that, she used to reside on the given address. Therefore, it
reveals that, at present she cannot be said to be totally shelterless. In
such circumstances, I am opinion that, the applicant is not entitled to
any residence order against respondent No.1. Hence, I record my
findings to point No.3, as in the negative.
AS TO POINT NO.4 :-
18. This point is in respect of prayer of maintenance by the
applicant against the respondent No.1. It is to be noted that, according
to the applicant the respondent is having General Store, at Nagpur,
-- 7 of 9 --
Judgment ~8~ C. C. NO.21/DV/2021
which is not at all denied by the respondent No.1. Therefore, it appears
that, the respondent No.1 is having source of income from the said
shop. The applicant is wife of the respondent No.1 and Prince and
Ardhya are their children. Being husband and father the respondent
No.1 is under the obligation to maintain them. But it reveals that, the
respondent No.1 is not providing any means of maintenance to
applicant. The applicant is unable to maintain herself and her children.
Prince and Ardhya are growing and school going children, therefore,
their expenses should be borne by the respondent No.1. Considering the
basic needs of the applicant, hiking prices of essential commodities and
respondent No.1 being able bodied person, I am opinion that, the
maintenance of I.5,000/- p.m. to the applicant and I.3,500/- p.m. to
each child is sufficient, as a maintenance to the applicant and children.
Hence, I record my findings to point No.4, as in the partly affirmative.
AS TO POINT NO.5 :-
19. This point is in respect of compensation claimed by the
applicant. According to the applicant due to domestic violence at the
hands of respondents, she got mental agony. However, no specific
evidence adduced by the applicant in order to show that, she suffer
damages due to act of the respondent No.1. The applicant certainly
suffer mental agony for that purpose she is entitled to compensation to
the tune of I.75,000/- from the respondent No.1. In the result, I record
my finding I record my findings to point No.5, accordingly and I
proceed to pass following order.
ORDER
(i) Application is partly allowed only against respondent
No.1.
-- 8 of 9 --
Judgment ~9~ C. C. NO.21/DV/2021
(ii) The respondent No.1 shall not cause any kind of
domestic violence to the applicant.
(iii) The respondent No.1 shall pay the amount of I.5,000/-
p.m. to the applicant and I.3,500/- p.m. to son Prince
and I.3,500/- p.m. to daughter Ardhya, as a
maintenance from the date of filing of present
application.
(iv) The respondent No.1 shall pay amount of I.75,000/-, as
a compensation to the applicant.
(v) The respondent shall pay amount of I.10,000/-, as a
cost of petition to the applicant.
(vi) The copy of the judgment be given to applicant and
respondents free of costs.
Date:-03/06/2025.
SRD.
( A. B. Jadhav )
Judicial Magistrate, (First Class),
71st Court, Bandra, Mumbai.
Dictated on :- 03/06/2025.
Transcribed on :- 03/06/2025
Checked on :- 05/06/2025
Signed on :- 05/06/2025
SRD
-- 9 of 9 --