Interim Order 1

Order Details: Order
Pdf Text: 1 C.C. No. 6/DV/2018
IN THE COURT OF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE
66th COURT, ANDHERI, MUMBAI
C.C. NO. 6/DV/2018
Savita Santosh Panda ...Aggrieved person.
v/s.
Santosh Sanatan Panda & Ors. ...Respondent
Order passed below interim application (Exh. 03) for Interim
Maintenance U/s. 23 of Protection of women from Domestic Violence
Act 2005.
1. Perused the application and say filed by respondents. Read the
affidavits of Assets and Liabilities filed on behalf of the both the parties.
Heard both parties at length. The present application is filed by the aggrieved
person for granting interim reliefs viz. protection order, monitory relief,
residence order and compensation for causing harassment.
2. It is the case of applicant that her marriage with respondent
no.1 was solemnized on 23/06/2006 at Shamlai Temple, Ganjam , Dist
Orissa. All the expenses of their marriage was borne by the father of the
applicant. After, marriage she had been to her matrimonial house where
respondent no.1 used to reside with his brother and parents. They had paid
Rs.3,00,000/ in cash and 150 gram gold to the respondents. Some
household articles as like Godrej cupboard and other household utensils were
given to respondents. They lived there for some months in her matrimonial
house and then came to Mumbai and started residing at Sakinaka.
Respondent no.1 used to assault the applicant under the influence of liquor.
The applicant had informed all these facts to her parents. Therefore, there
was a meeting arranged for settlement of the dispute. In that meeting
respondent no.1 had assaulted the parents of applicant under the influence of
liquor. All the respondents used to toucher her physically and mentally. On
02/11/2007, her brother had visited her matrimonial house to have
discussion with her husband. Her husband i.e respondent no.1 and his
brother respondent no.4 abused him and therefore complaint was lodged in
Sakinaka police station. On 14/06/2009, she gave birth to female child. All
the respondents were not happy since they wanted a babyboy. On the count
-- 1 of 3 --
2 C.C. No. 6/DV/2018
of babygirl all the respondents have tourched and illtreated the complainant.
Therefore, she left the matrimonial house and went to her parental house.
3. The respondent no.1 is earning Rs.20,000/ per month as a
salary and having other source of income i.e house as well as landed property.
He has never paid a single pai to applicant and their daughters for their
livelihood, despite of having sufficient means.
4. The application is resisted by filing say at Exh.9A and detailed
reply dated 19/03/2019. The contention of respondent is that all the
allegations levelled against them are false and concocted. The application is
filed only to harass the respondent and to have wrongful gain. Further, it is
his contention that he is earning Rs.9,600/ per month as a gross salary and
his net earning is 7,000/ and prayed to reject the application.
5. Having heard both the counsels and perusal of assets and
liabilities affidavits filed by both the parties. It is seen that the applicant is
studied upto 6th std. and has no source of income. However, the respondent
was earning 5,000/ at the time of marriage, 7,000/ at the time of separation
and 5,000/ at present.
6. The respondent no.1 has specifically admitted in his reply that
he is earning 9,600/ per month whereas, has denied that he owned the
property at his native place.
7. Admittedly the applicant is living alongwith her parents and
therefore I am not inclined to allow separate accommodation or interim
protection order at this stage.
8. The trial would take its considerable time. The applicant is
residing with her parents alongwith her minor daughter. Admittedly,
respondent no.1 has not paid any amount as a maintenance till date. Being
husband of the applicant, he is bound to maintain her and their daughter.
Despite, of having sufficient means he has avoided to maintain his wife and
daughter. Therefore, I am of the humble opinion that it would be just and
proper to grant interim maintenance of Rs. 4,000/ per month to aggrieved
person and Rs.2,000/ per month to her minor daughter. Respondent no.1
has not paid any amount earlier. Therefore, such amounts need to be granted
-- 2 of 3 --
3 C.C. No. 6/DV/2018
from the date of filing of the present application. In this view of the matter, I
passed the following order:
O R D E R
1. The application is partly allowed.
2. Respondent no.1 shall pay an amount of 6,000/ (Rupees Six Thousand
Only) per month to the aggrieved person and her minor daughter collectively
as interim maintenance from the date of filing of the present application till
disposal of the main petition.
3. The rest of the prayers are hereby rejected.
4. Copy of this order be given to both the parties free of costs.
Sd/
Date : 15/07/2022 (Vijay C. Gawai)
Metropolitan Magistrate,
66th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 3 of 3 --