Final Order 1

Order Details: Copy  of Judgment
Pdf Text: 1 147/DV/2018
Filed on .. 28/05/2018
Registered on .. 28/05/2018
Delivered on .. 16/01/2019
Duration .. 00Y 07M 19D
CNR No. MHMM190061862018
Exh.
IN THE COURT OF THE 65th METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
ANDHERI, MUMBAI.
(Presided over by S.C.Pathare)
147DV2018
Mrs. Sushma Avnish Patel
Age :22 Years, Occupation : Nil.
R/o: Room No.7, Building No.80
Western Railway Quarters,
Andheri East, Mumbai69 … Petitioner
V/s
Avnish Jagannath Patel.
Age : 22 years, Occupation : Service.
R/o: Room No.G1504, Building No.19,
Sangharsh Nagar, Sakinaka,
Andheri East, Mumbai72. … Respondent
Claim : U/sec.12 of The Protection of women from Domestic
Violence Act, 2005.
Appearance : Ld Advocate Nagesh Mishra for Petitioner.
J U D G M E N T
(Delivered on 16.01.2019)
1. Factual matrix :
By way of present application, the applicant claimed
-- 1 of 5 --
2 147/DV/2018
interim various reliefs.
2. It is contended that petitioner lady got married with
respondent husband on 26.11.2015. However, thereafter, she was
subjected to abuses, beatings, threats by the respondent. Further it is
alleged that respondent husband was doubting her character and on
that count also he was subjecting her to domestic violence.
3. It is contended that accused had taken her some intimate
photographs and started uploading the same on the media. She also
preferred various complaints against him in the police station. She had
issued legal notice to him but in vain.
4. Respondent was present during mediation process but thereafter
he remained absent continuously. Therefore, on 29.12.2018 , Exparte
order came to be passed.
5. Following points arose for my determination :
SR.NO. POINTS FINDINGS
1 Whether petitioner is entitled to reliefs,
as prayed ? ..Partly Yes.
2 What order ? As per operative
part.
R E A S O N S
As to point No. 1 :
6. In order to show existence of probabilities in her favour,
petitioner lady examined herself as PW1 vide affidavit dated
29.12.2018. She has closed evidence by tendering pursis dated
11.01.2019.
7. I have heard arguments advanced by the Ld counsel
-- 2 of 5 --
3 147/DV/2018
appearing on behalf of the petitioner lady. Nobody appeared for
arguments on behalf of respondent.
8. Perusal of affidavit of chief examination of PW1 goes to
show that she has reproduced the averments made in the application
Exh.1. Respondent continuously remained absent and despite
opportunities neither filed his reply nor cross examined PW1.
Therefore, her testimony has gone unchallenged. Respondent is neither
disputing the allegations levelled against him nor taking part in chief
and cross examination, therefore in view of provisions of sec.114(g) of
the Evidence Act, I am inclined to draw adverse inference against him
that he has no defence at all.
9. Nothing has come on the record whether petitioner lady is
having any job /income /properties. Therefore, I have to accept that
she is unable to maintain herself.
10. So far as income of respondent husband is concern as per
the testimony of PW1 he is serving in Pumani Traders at Thane and
earns Rs.25,000/pm. It is true that no any documentary evidence has
been brought by the petitioner lady in that regard. However
considering the present inflation and minimum wages etc, it appears
that he is having sufficient means.
11. From medical certificate produced by her dated 18.02.2018
it appears that she was injured. From the evidence of PW1 it appears
that she is presently staying at her parents home, therefore she is also
entitled to alternate accommodation charges to some extent.
12. In view of the supra peculiar facts, circumstances and
evidence, I proceed to pass the following order :
-- 3 of 5 --
4 147/DV/2018
O R D E R
1. The petition stands partly allowed.
2. The respondent husband shall not cause any domestic
violence to petitioner in any manner.
3. Respondent husband shall not circulate objectionable
material about petitioner lady in media etc in any manner.
4. Respondent husband shall pay maintenance including
rental charges total Rs.7,500/pm to the petitioner wife from the date
of this petition.
5. Respondent husband shall pay Rs.3,000/ to the petitioner
towards the costs of the present litigation.
6. Vide Sec.24 of the said Act, copy of this order be provided
to both the parties, free of costs.
7. Petitioner is at liberty to produce copy of this order before
the concern Protection officer & concern PSO, as and when required.
8. During execution proceeding, parties will be at liberty to
again apply for mediation, if required.
9. Respondent is continuously absent. Hence petitioner party
to communicate this order to him, by RPAD & report compliance, as
early as possible.
Sd/
Date : 16.01.2019 (S.C. Pathare)
Metropolitan Magistrate,
ask 65th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 4 of 5 --
5 147/DV/2018
“I affirm that the contents of this P.D.F. file Judgment are
same word for word as per original Judgment.
Name of Steno : A.S. Kubal
Court Name : S.C. Pathare,Metropolitan Magistrate, 65th Court,
Andheri, Mumbai.
Judgment signed by Presiding Officer on : 16.01.2019.
Judgment uploaded on : 16.01.2019.
-- 5 of 5 --