Final Order 2

Order Details: Copy of Judgment
Pdf Text: C. C. No. 247 DV 2019 Deeksha Vs Varun
CNR-MHMM18-007830-2019
Judgment, Exh.16
Received on – 05.11.2019
Registered on – 06.11.2019
Decided on – 11.06.2024
Duration – 04 Ys. 07 Ms. 06 Ds.
Exh.16
IN THE COURT OF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
12TH COURT, BANDRA, MUMBAI
(Presided over by Komalsing Rajput)
C. C. No.247/DV/2019
Mrs. Deeksha Varun Mehra,
Age – 39 years, Occ.- Homemaker,
R/o. Room No.21/63, Sea Pearl,
O.N.G.C. Colony, K. C. Marg,
Opp. Lilavati Hospital, Bandra West,
Mumbai. APPLICANT
Vs.
Mr. Varun Mehra,
Age – 41 years, Occ.- Business,
R/o. Room No.21/63, Sea Pearl,
O.N.G.C. Colony, K. C. Marg,
Opp. Lilavati Hospital, Bandra West,
Mumbai. RESPONDENT
Advocates for the Parties –
For Applicant - Advocate, Shweta R. More.
For Respondent - Advocate Aishwarya D. Athawale.
JUDGMENT
(Delivered on 11th June, 2024)
Page - 1/6
-- 1 of 6 --
C. C. No. 247 DV 2019 Deeksha Vs Varun
CNR-MHMM18-007830-2019
Judgment, Exh.16
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 Deeksha Varun Mehra, hereinafter
referred as applicant Deeksha, was solemnized with Mr. Varun Mehra,
hereinafter referred as respondent, on 07.03.2003, at Amritsar, Punjab.
She resumed cohabitation with respondent at Mumbai, on above
mentioned address. A son Master Parth, born out of said marriage on
07.11.2007. In the year 2019, respondent filed divorce petition at
Amritsar, Punjab. Applicant approached Supreme Court and sought
transfer of this petition to Mumbai. The applicant was willing to save the
marriage, therefore, the matter was settled before Supreme Court by filing
certain consent terms. But respondent was not ready to follow those
consent terms. The applicant came to know that the proceeding before
Supreme Court, was then disposed off and respondent is trying to sell the
property, i.e. House mentioned in title clause. The respondent forced
applicant’s parents and extorted an amount of Rs.10 lacs and jewellery
from them. Applicant apprehending her dispossession from the said house
and as respondent doing his business further apprehending that the life of
applicant and her son may spoil, filed present application before this court.
Applicant sought various reliefs, protection, injunction, maintenance and
compensation, etc.
3. The respondent appeared, but not filed any say. Therefore, matter
was proceeded without say of respondent.
4. Applicant in support of her case applicant examined herself as
A.W.1, Deeksha Varun Mehra, vide her evidence affidavit, Exh.11. She
Page - 2/6
-- 2 of 6 --
C. C. No. 247 DV 2019 Deeksha Vs Varun
CNR-MHMM18-007830-2019
Judgment, Exh.16
also relied on certain documents. The respondent neither cross-examined
her nor led any evidence. He also not argued the matter. Heard Ld.
Advocate for the applicant and perused the written notes of arguments
submitted on her behalf.
5. Considering submissions, pleadings and 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? .....In the negative.
2. Does the applicant entitled to the reliefs as
prayed for? ….In the negative.
3. What order? …..Application is rejected.
REASONS
AS TO POINTS NOS.1 AND 2 – Domestic violence and reliefs
6. The applicant A.W.1, Deeksha Varun Mehra, vide her evidence
affidavit, Exh.11, reproduced the contents of the main application and
deposed that her marriage with the respondent was solemnized on
07.03.2003, at Amritsar, Punjab. She resumed cohabitation with
respondent at Mumbai and a son Master Parth, born out of said marriage
on 07.11.2007. In the year 2019, respondent filed divorce petition at
Amritsar, Punjab. Applicant approached Supreme Court and sought
transfer of this petition to Mumbai. The applicant was willing to save the
marriage, therefore, the matter was settled before Supreme Court by
filing certain consent terms. But respondent was not ready to follow
those consent terms. The applicant came to know that the proceeding
before Supreme Court, was then disposed off and respondent is trying to
Page - 3/6
-- 3 of 6 --
C. C. No. 247 DV 2019 Deeksha Vs Varun
CNR-MHMM18-007830-2019
Judgment, Exh.16
sell the property, i.e. House mentioned in title clause. The respondent
forced applicant’s parents and extorted an amount of Rs.10 lacs and
jewellery from them. Applicant apprehending her dispossession from the
said house and as respondent doing his business further apprehending
that the life of applicant and her son may spoil. There is possibility of
economic abuse of herself and her son. Therefore, she filed present
application before this court and claimed various reliefs.
7. The above evidence is not challenged by the respondent. It
remained intact. Then the question arises whether applicant is entitled to
reliefs or not? For this purpose it is to be scrutinized whether applicant
on the basis of evidence produced succeeded in proving the fact that she
had suffered domestic violence at the instance of respondent.
8. If we go through the main application and the evidence produced
the facts can be summarized in a way that marriage of the applicant has
been solemnized with respondent at Amritsar, Punjab. She came to
Mumbai. In the year 2019, respondent filed divorce petition at Amritsar.
The applicant approached Supreme Court, for transfer of this petition to
Mumbai. The said matter before Supreme Court, was amicably settled in
terms of Consent Terms, as agreed. However, respondent not followed
those terms. She came to know that respondent may sell the house at
Mumbai, where she is residing. Therefore, apprehending dispossession
and economic violence she filed present application.
9. For granting reliefs under D. V. Act the condition precedent is
proof of domestic violence in a shared household at the instance of
respondent. In the present matter neither there is any fact alleging
domestic violence pleaded nor any evidence given by the applicant. She
just pleaded and deposed that apprehending dispossession and economic
Page - 4/6
-- 4 of 6 --
C. C. No. 247 DV 2019 Deeksha Vs Varun
CNR-MHMM18-007830-2019
Judgment, Exh.16
violence she filed present application as respondent is not following
terms of settlement. No documentary evidence either about agreed terms
of settlement or any other nature given or produced on record to draw
the inference of domestic violence. Thus, after scrutiny of the evidence
produced it can be easily inferred that applicant failed to prove the fact
of domestic violence caused to her in a shared household by the
respondent. Therefore, I recorded my finding on Point No.1, in the
negative and consequently on Point No.2, as well, in the negative. In
view of these findings applicant is not entitled to any relief. Therefore,
following order -
ORDER
A. Application is rejected. No order as to cost.
B. Copy of this judgment shall be given free of costs to both the
parties.
MUMBAI (KOMALSING RAJPUT)
DATE – 11.06.2024 M.M., 12TH COURT, BANDRA, MUMBAI
Page - 5/6
-- 5 of 6 --
C. C. No. 247 DV 2019 Deeksha Vs Varun
CNR-MHMM18-007830-2019
Judgment, Exh.16
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 : 11.06.2024
signed by P.O. on : 11.06.2024
uploaded on : 13.06.2024
Page - 6/6
-- 6 of 6 --