Final Order 3

Order Details: Copy of Judgment
Pdf Text: C. C. No. 1 DV 2020 Nasima Vs Naved and ors.
CNR MHMM18-000685-2020
Exh.12
Received on – 30.12.2019
Registered on – 01.01.2020
Decided on – 06.04.2024
Duration – 04 Ys. 03 Ms. 06 Ds.
Exh.12
IN THE COURT OF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
12TH COURT, BANDRA, MUMBAI
(Presided over by Komalsing Rajput)
C. C. No.1/DV/2020
1. Mrs. Nasima Naved Ansari,
D/o. Munna Ansari.
Age – 33 years, Occ.- Nurse,
2. Master Noman Naved Ansari,
Age – Minor, under the guardianship
of Applicant No.1,
Both R/o. B/504, New Maharashtra Nagar,
Maharashtra Building, Near Sunni Noori
Masjid, 90th Road, Dharavi, Mumbai. APPLICANT
Vs.
1. Mr. Naved Akhtar Haroon Ansari,
Age – 35 years, Occu.- Service,
2. Mrs. Sugrabee Haroon Ansari,
Age – 65 years, Occu.- Not known,
3. Miss. Aaliya Nadeem Ansari,
Age – 40 years, Occu.- Not known,
4. Miss. Aafiya Mohd. Farookh Ansari,
Age – 26 years, Occu.- Not known,
Page - 1/8
-- 1 of 8 --
C. C. No. 1 DV 2020 Nasima Vs Naved and ors.
CNR MHMM18-000685-2020
Exh.12
All R/o. Room No.406, Khatija Tower,
Ghas Bazar, Madanpura, Nagpada,
Mumbai. RESPONDENTS
Advocates for the Parties –
For Applicant - Advocate, Kayam Ansari.
For Respondents - Advocate, Mrs. Nayab Qamar Shaikh.
JUDGMENT
(Delivered on 6th April, 2024)
1. The present application is filed under Section 12 of Protection of
Women from Domestic Violence Act, (hereinafter referred as D. V. Act
for the sake of brevity), seeking various reliefs.
2. The brief contents of the application are, as -
The marriage of the applicant Mrs. Nasima Naved Ansari D/o.
Munna Ansari, hereinafter referred as applicant Nasima, was solemnized
with Respondent No.1, Mr. Naved Akhtar Haroon Ansari, hereinafter
referred as main respondent, on 23.04.2016, at Sion, Mumbai. Out of
said marriage Applicant No.2, Master Noman, born. In the said marriage
all the expenses were born by parents of the applicant. All the house
utensils, etc. were also given to the applicant and handed over to
respondents.
After marriage applicant had been to the house of respondents.
They started causing physical, mental and sexual abuse to her. They
demanded dowry and applicant was compelled to pay Rs.45,000/- to main
respondent for purchase of motorcycle. Then they demanded another
amount of Rs.5,00,000/- and threatened if said amount is not paid main
respondent will remarry. They taken all her jewellery and cash of
Rs.13,000/-. Page - 2/8
-- 2 of 8 --
C. C. No. 1 DV 2020 Nasima Vs Naved and ors.
CNR MHMM18-000685-2020
Exh.12
When applicant became pregnant she had been to her parents’.
After the birth of son Noman, respondents neither came to see him nor
fetched her back. Respondents taken all her jewellery and cash.
Therefore, she has lodged report with Nagpada Police Station, Mumbai,
for offences punishable under Section 498-A, etc. of Indian Penal Code.
The main respondent is having illicit relations. Despite repeated efforts
respondent had not fetched her back. She has no means of income to earn
livelihood and her son Noman.
The main respondent is working with a Swiggy, as delivery boy
and earning Rs.20,000/- per month from the said occupation. In addition
to it he also works with a printing press and earns additional income of
Rs.15,000/- per month. Therefore, applicant approached this court and
filed the present application in which she claimed reliefs of injunction,
residence order, return of stridhan, maintenance and compensation.
3. After service of the notice on respondents they failed to appear,
therefore, on 22.11.2021, matter was proceeded ex parte against them.
Later on they appeared and sought to set aside this order. On 19.12.2023,
the order was set aside subject to payment of cost of Rs.10,000/-.
However, respondents failed to pay the cost. Therefore, the order of
proceeding ex parte remained intact and matter was proceeded further in
the same manner.
4. Applicant in support of her case applicant examined herself as
A.W.1, Mrs. Nasima Naved Ansari D/o. Munna Ansari, vide her evidence
affidavit, Exh.6. She also relied on certain documents. The respondents
neither cross-examined her nor led any evidence. They also not argued
out the matter. The written submissions, on behalf of the applicant are in
tune her pleadings and evidence. Considering submissions, pleadings and
Page - 3/8
-- 3 of 8 --
C. C. No. 1 DV 2020 Nasima Vs Naved and ors.
CNR MHMM18-000685-2020
Exh.12
other facts and circumstances on record, I recorded my findings on
following points for the reasons discussed below -
Sr. No. POINTS FINDINGS
1. Does it prove that the respondent committed
domestic violence against applicant? .....Partly proved only
against Respo. No.1.
2. Does the applicant entitled to the reliefs as
prayed for? ….Partly proved only
against Respo. No.1.
3. What order? …..Appli. is partly allowed.
REASONS
AS TO POINTS NOS.1 AND 2 – Domestic violence and reliefs
5. The applicant A.W.1, Mrs. Nasima Naved Ansari D/o. Munna
Ansari, vide her evidence affidavit, Exh.6, reproduced the contents of
the application, her marriage with main respondent solemnized on
23.04.2016, at Sion, Mumbai. Out of said marriage Applicant No.2,
Master Noman, born. In the said marriage all the expenses were born by
parents of the applicant. All the house utensils, etc. were also given to
the applicant and handed over to respondents. After marriage applicant
had been to the house of respondents. They started causing physical,
mental and sexual abuse to her. They demanded dowry and applicant
was compelled to pay Rs.45,000/- to main respondent for purchase of
motorcycle. Then they demanded another amount of Rs.5,00,000/- and
threatened if said amount is not paid main respondent will remarry.
They taken all her jewellery and cash of Rs.13,000/-. When applicant
became pregnant she had been to her parents’. After the birth of son
Noman, respondents neither came to see him nor fetched her back.
Respondents taken all her jewellery and cash. Therefore, she has lodged
report with Nagpada Police Station, Mumbai, for offences punishable
under Section 498-A, etc. of Indian Penal Code.
Page - 4/8
-- 4 of 8 --
C. C. No. 1 DV 2020 Nasima Vs Naved and ors.
CNR MHMM18-000685-2020
Exh.12
6. She further deposed that the main respondent is having illicit
relations. Despite repeated efforts respondent had not fetched her back.
She has no means of income to earn livelihood and her son Noman. The
main respondent is working with a Swiggy, as delivery boy and earning
Rs.20,000/- per month from the said occupation. In addition to it he also
works with a printing press and earns additional income of Rs.15,000/-
per month. Therefore, applicant approached this court and filed the
present application in which she claimed reliefs of injunction, residence
order, return of stridhan, maintenance and compensation.
7. The above evidence is not challenged by the respondents. It
remained intact. There is nothing in it from which it can be said that the
contents of the application and consequent evidence affidavit in support
of it are false. The various incidences of ill-treatment causing domestic
violence are almost admitted, the desertion and non-arrangement of
means of livelihood also proved.
8. However, it is came on record that allegations are also against
remaining respondents as well along with main respondent, it is also
came on record that the main reliefs to be granted are of such a nature
which can be granted only against main respondent. Therefore, no
reliefs can be granted against other respondents. Accordingly, I
recorded my findings on Point No.1, as partly proved only against main
respondent.
9. So far as reliefs are concerned applicant claimed injunction,
residence order, return of stridhan, maintenance and compensation.
Regarding injunction and protection order admittedly applicant is residing
separately since long, therefore, there is no point in allowing this prayer.
About stridhan just oral facts came on record, there is no substantive
Page - 5/8
-- 5 of 8 --
C. C. No. 1 DV 2020 Nasima Vs Naved and ors.
CNR MHMM18-000685-2020
Exh.12
evidence to draw the inference of handing over of stridhan. The
particulars of articles, exact transactions of handing over, etc. are vague.
Therefore, there is doubt about this claim and as such this relief also can
not be granted. From the evidence on record the fact of desertion and
non-arrangement of funds and absence of any abode to reside is proved,
the monthly allowance in the form of monitory relief, house rent along
with compensation can be granted. The remaining reliefs i.e. residence
order, maintenance and compensation, needs to be ordered.
10. The main respondent is doing a private job as a delivery boy and
earning salary. About his income the evidence is somewhat vague. The
facts gathered from the pleadings, evidence and other material on record
about such income and status of the parties, I am of the opinion that
following order will serve the cause of justice, hence order -
ORDER
A. Application is partly allowed.
B. Respondent No.1, Mr. Naved Akhtar Haroon Ansari, is directed
to pay the maintenance of Rs.4,000/- (Rs. Four Thousands Only) per
month, to applicant No.1, Mrs. Nasima Naved Ansari D/o. Munna
Ansari, and Rs.2,000/- (Rs. Two Thousand Only) per month, to the child
Master Noman Naved Ansari, from the date of application till the month
of March 2024, as past maintenance.
It means respondent shall pay total amount of Rs.6,000/- per month
to the applicant and her child from the date of application till the month
of March 2024, as past maintenance.
C. Respondent No.1, Mr. Naved Akhtar Haroon Ansari, is directed to
pay the maintenance of Rs.6,000/- (Rs. Six Thousands Only) per month,
to applicant No.1, Mrs. Nasima Naved Ansari D/o. Munna Ansari, and
Rs.2,000/- (Rs. Two Thousand Only) per month, to the child Master
Page - 6/8
-- 6 of 8 --
C. C. No. 1 DV 2020 Nasima Vs Naved and ors.
CNR MHMM18-000685-2020
Exh.12
Noman Naved Ansari, from the month of April 2024 as future
maintenance.
It means respondent shall pay total amount of Rs.8,000/- per month
to the applicant and her child from the month of April 2024 as future
maintenance.
D. Respondent No.1, Mr. Naved Akhtar Haroon Ansari, is further
directed to pay the amount of Rs.2,000/- (Rs. Two Thousand only) per
month towards house rent from the month of April, 2024.
E. The reliefs claimed against all the remaining respondents, are
rejected.
F. Copy of this judgment shall be given free of costs to both the
parties.
Sd/-
MUMBAI (KOMALSING RAJPUT)
DATE – 06.04.2024 M.M., 12TH COURT, BANDRA, MUMBAI
Page - 7/8
-- 7 of 8 --
C. C. No. 1 DV 2020 Nasima Vs Naved and ors.
CNR MHMM18-000685-2020
Exh.12
I affirm that the contents of this PDF file judgment are same word for
ward as per original judgment.
Court Name : Komalsing Rajput
Name of Steno : S. R. Parab
Date : 05.04.2024
signed by P.O. on : 05.04.2024
uploaded on : 12.04.2024
Page - 8/8
-- 8 of 8 --