Interim Order 1

Order Details: Interim Maintenance Order
Pdf Text: 1 C. C. No. 50/DV/2018
IN THE COURT OF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
RAILWAY MOBILE COURT, ANDHERI, MUMBAI
C. C. No. 50/DV/2018
Needa Zuber Shaikh ... Applicant
V/s.
Zuber Sadiq Shaikh + 2 ... Respondents
ORDER BELOW INTERIM APPLICATION DATED 09/02/2018
1. This is an application filed by the applicant for getting
interim reliefs under the provision of Section 23 of the Protection of
Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short 'the Act').
2. In brief, it is the case of the applicant that she got married
with respondent no. 1 on 27/05/2009 as per Muslim Rites. Respondent
no. 2 is mother-in-law and respondent no. 3 is sister-in-law of the
applicant. After marriage the respondents properly treated the
applicant for initial some period. Thereafter the respondents started to
ill-treat the applicant. Though respondent no. 3 was married, she used
to reside at the matrimonial home of the applicant. During her
pregnancy also the respondents harassed the applicant. The
respondents forced the applicant to go to her parents house for delivery.
The applicant gave birth to her son Numer on 30/03/2010. Thereafter
when the applicant returned to her matrimonial home, she noticed that
respondent no. 1 is having love-affair with one lady. When the
applicant objected respondent no. 1 for his love-affair, he abused and
assaulted the applicant. Respondent nos. 2 and 3 also instigated
respondent no. 1 against the applicant. The applicant gave birth to her
daughter Arnaz on 26/11/2011 at her parents place. Thereafter the
applicant returned back to her matrimonial home. The respondents
-- 1 of 5 --
2 C. C. No. 50/DV/2018
used to cause harassment to the applicant. The applicant was forced to
work like domestic help of respondent no. 3 during her pregnancy. The
respondents also demanded Rs. 50,000/- for purchasing bike for
respondent no. 1. Lastly, the respondents abused and assaulted the
applicant and drove her out of her matrimonial home. The respondents
are still passing threats to the applicant and harassing her. The
applicant lodged N.C. reports against the respondents from time to
time. The applicant has also lodged F.I.R. against the respondents on
13/08/2017 for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 406,
323 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The
daughter of the applicant is staying with her. The son of the applicant
is staying with respondent no. 1. The respondents have refused to
allow the applicant to reside at her matrimonial home. Hence, this
application.
3. The respondents resisted the application by filing their
reply (Exh. 6). It is admitted that the applicant is wife of respondent
no. 1 and they are blessed with one daughter and one son. It is also not
in dispute that custody of the daughter is with the applicant and
custody of son is with respondent no. 1. The respondents have denied
all the adverse allegations made against them by the applicant. The
respondents submitted that all the allegations of the applicant are false.
The applicant herself has left her matrimonial home. At many times
respondent no. 1 has tried to convince the applicant to stay with him.
However, the applicant did not gave any response to respondent no. 1.
No any incident of domestic violence took place. The applicant has
completely ruined the life of respondent no. 1 to satisfy her personal
grudges. The age of respondent no. 2 is 85 years and she cannot even
properly walk. Respondent no. 2 is suffering from various ailments.
Respondent nos. 2 and 3 have been unnecessarily dragged into the
-- 2 of 5 --
3 C. C. No. 50/DV/2018
proceeding only to harass respondent no. 1. The application is baseless.
The applicant is not entitled for any reliefs. Hence, the application
may be rejected.
4. I have heard the argument of the learned advocate of the
applicant and the respondents. I have gone through the record. The
case is at initial stage. At this stage I do not find any reason to
disbelieve the allegations made by the applicant to the extent of
respondent no. 1. Respondent no. 1 also failed to show any convincing
reason for making false allegations against him by the applicant. Had
there been good treatment to the applicant at the house of respondent
no. 1, she would not have thought of leaving his house. The allegations
of the applicant are also supported by N.C. reports given by her from
time to time and contents of F.I.R. lodged by her. The allegations made
by the applicant prima-facie shows that the applicant is victim of
domestic violence. Therefore, the applicant is certainly entitled for
appropriate and necessary interim reliefs under the provisions of the
Act.
5. The applicant has prayed that the respondents be
restrained from causing any harassment to her. As stated above, the
record prima-facie shows that the applicant is victim of domestic
violence. Therefore, at this stage the applicant is certainly entitled for
the protection order to the extent of respondent no. 1, as prayed.
6. The applicant has prayed that respondent no. 1 be directed
to pay Rs. 25,000/- per month for the interim maintenance of the
applicant and Rs. 10,000/- per month for the interim maintenance of
her daughter. The applicant has also prayed that respondent no. 1 be
directed to pay Rs. 3,000/- per month to the applicant for the school
expenses of the daughter. The applicant submitted that respondent no.
-- 3 of 5 --
4 C. C. No. 50/DV/2018
1 is owner of car and bike. He is also having business of catering and
hair cutting saloon. The monthly income of respondent no. 1 is
Rs.80,000/- per month. The applicant's daughter is in seventh standard
and her monthly school expenses is of Rs. 2,850/-. As against this,
respondent no. 1 submitted that he was Ola cab driver and he was
earning Rs. 15,000/- per month. However due to false F.I.R. lodged by
the applicant his employer has terminated his service. He is completely
jobless. He is doing the work whichever he is getting and earning only
Rs.5,000/- to Rs. 10,000/- per month. He has not paid EMI of his car
since last seven months. Due to which his car is likely to be attached
for recovery of outstanding amount. The saloon was of his deceased
father. He is the only male member in the family. He is having the
responsibility of his old aged mother and son.
7. I have considered the submissions of both the parties.
Record shows that the applicant is a victim of domestic violence.
Admittedly, the custody of the daughter is with the applicant. It is not
the case of respondent no. 1 that the applicant is working lady.
Respondent no. 1 cannot throw the entire responsibility of up-bringing
the daughter on the applicant. It is the legal and moral duty of
respondent no. 1 to provide reasonable amount to the applicant for
interim maintenance of the applicant and her daughter. Admittedly,
respondent no. 1 is earning person. It is not in dispute there is one
saloon. Though respondent no. 1 has stated that his deceased father
was owner of the saloon, after the death of his father and due to the
fact that the mother of respondent no. 1 is old aged and she is unable
to walk properly, certainly it is respondent no. 1 who is controlling the
saloon. So record shows that respondent no. 1 has source of income.
However, there is no material to show the actual income of respondent
no. 1. In the circumstances, considering the status of the parties which
-- 4 of 5 --
5 C. C. No. 50/DV/2018
appears from the record and considering the fact that respondent no. 1
is having responsibility of his old aged mother and son, it would be
proper to direct respondent no. 1 to pay Rs. 2,500/- per month to the
applicant for her interim maintenance and Rs. 3,500/- per month to the
applicant for interim maintenance and school expenses of the daughter.
In view of above discussion, the application is liable to be partly
allowed. Hence, the order.
ORDER
1. The application is partly allowed.
2. Respondent no. 1 is restrained from committing any act of
domestic violence against the applicant.
3. Respondent no. 1 shall pay Rs. 2,500/- per month to the
applicant for her interim maintenance and Rs. 3,500/- per month for
the interim maintenance and school expenses of her daughter from the
date of the application till disposal of the case.
4. Costs in the cause.
(Imran R. Marchiya)
Metropolitan Magistrate,
Railway Mobile Court,
Date : 13/12/2019 Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 5 of 5 --