Interim Order 1

Order Details: Interim Maintenance Order
Pdf Text: 1 C. C. No. 317/DV/2018
IN THE COURT OF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
RAILWAY MOBILE COURT, ANDHERI, MUMBAI
C. C. No. 317/DV/2018
Shaheen Wasim Shaikh ... Applicant
V/s.
Wasim Nazir Ahmed Shaikh + 4 ... Respondents
ORDER BELOW APPLICATION DATED 22/10/2018 FILED BY THE
APPLICANT FOR INTERIM RELIEFS
1. This is an application filed by the applicant for getting
interim reliefs under the provisions 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 30/12/2016 at Jogeshwari (West), Mumbai,
as per Muslim rites and customs. Respondent no. 2 is fatherinlaw,
respondent no. 3 is motherinlaw and respondent no. 4 is brotherin
law of the applicant. Respondent no. 5 is wife of respondent no. 4.
After marriage initially the relation between the applicant and
respondent no. 1 were cordial. However, gradually their relation
started getting strained because of difference of opinion between them.
The respondents also started to illtreat the applicant on account of
insufficient dowry. Respondents nos. 2 to 5 started to quarrel with the
applicant on petty issues. Respondent no. 1 used to assault the
applicant. The applicant also came to know that respondent no. 1 is
having extra marital affair with one girl. When the applicant asked
respondent no. 1 about his affair, respondent no. 1 assaulted the
applicant and he started abusing her in most filthy language. On
16/06/2018 on the day of RamzanEid all the respondents sent the
-- 1 of 5 --
2 C. C. No. 317/DV/2018
applicant to the house of her parents by saying that they will also come
in the evening for dinner to the house of her parents. However, in
evening the respondents did not turnedup. On next day when the
applicant and her mother went to the house of the respondents,
respondent nos. 3 and 5 refused to take the applicant in her
matrimonial house. They also push the applicant and her minor
daughter. They even not allowed the applicant to take the clothes of
her minor daughter and her vaccination card. Lastly, the applicant
came back with her minor daughter and mother to the house of her
parents. On the say of respondent no. 1 on 01/07/2018 the applicant
alongwith her family members went to her matrimonial home for
amicable talk. However, at that time instead of settlement talks, the
respondents started abusing the applicant and her family members in
filthy language. The applicant lodged report of said incident in MIDC
police station. On the same day the respondents came to the house of
the parents of the applicant and started threatening them by asking
them as to why they went to police station. The respondents have
committed cruelty against the applicant. At present the applicant is
staying with her minor daughter at the house of her parents. The
applicant has gone under the depression to such an extent that she is
not able to do anything. The applicant is having no source of income.
Hence, this application.
3. The respondents resisted the application by filing their
reply (Exh. 9A). Admittedly, the applicant is wife of respondent no. 1
and they are blessed with one daughter. The respondents have denied
all the adverse allegations made against them. It is the case of the
respondents that they never illtreated the applicant. The applicant was
not doing any household work at her matrimonial place. The applicant
used to quarrel with the respondents. The applicant is a woman of
-- 2 of 5 --
3 C. C. No. 317/DV/2018
suspicious in nature. The applicant was suspecting that respondent no.
1 is having extramarital relation with other girl. The applicant herself
has left her matrimonial home with her daughter. The applicant failed
to discharge her marital obligations. The respondents have not accused
any harassment to the applicant. The applicant is not entitled claim
any relief. Hence, the application may be rejected.
4. I have gone through the record. The case is at initial stage.
Both parties have made several allegations against each other. Those
allegations may be inquired into at the time of trial. The allegations of
the applicant is supported her affidavit. At this stage I do not find any
reason to disbelieve the case of the applicant. Respondent no. 1 also
failed to show any convincing reason for making false allegations
against him by the applicant. I do not find any reason for the applicant
to stay at her parental place with her minor daughter, except the ill
treatment given to her by the respondents. The allegations made by the
applicant primafacie shows that the applicant is victim of domestic
violence. Therefore, the applicant is certainly entitled for appropriate
and necessary interim reliefs under the provisions the Act.
5. The applicant has prayed that the respondents be
restrained from causing any harassment to her. I have heard both sides
advocates. I have also heard the applicant and respondent no. 1 in
person. The applicant submitted that since 16/06/2018 she is staying
at the house of her parents and since then there is no contact between
her and respondent no. 1. Considering said fact I am of the view that
there is no any need to pass general order of protection.
-- 3 of 5 --
4 C. C. No. 317/DV/2018
6. The applicant has prayed that respondent no. 1 be directed
to pay Rs. 40,000/ per month to her towards interim maintenance of
the applicant and her daughter. The applicant submitted that she is
depend on her parents. The applicant has no source of income.
Respondent no. 1 is doing business of fourwheeler cars and he is
earning Rs. 1,50,000/ per month. On the point of maintenance
respondent no. 1 submitted that he is working with Abbas Motors as
sales agent on commission basis and earning Rs. 10,000/ per month.
The applicant is well qualified and working in private establishment
and earning Rs. 20,000/ per month. I have considered the submissions
of both the parties. As stated above, the applicant is victim of domestic
violence and at present she is staying with her minor daughter at the
house of her parents. At this stage there is nothing on record to show
that the applicant is working and earning. In the circumstances, it is
the legal and moral duty of respondent no. 1 to give reasonable amount
to the applicant for the interim maintenance of the applicant and her
minor daughter. At this stage, there is no evidence regarding the actual
income of respondent no. 1. Therefore, considering the status of the
parties which appears from the record it would be proper to grant
interim maintenance of Rs. 6,000/ per month for the applicant and her
minor daughter from the date of the application till disposal of the case.
7. The applicant has also prayed for other relief including
direction to the respondents to handover vaccination file of the minor
child and also clothes of the applicant and her daughter to her. As per
respondent no. 1 the clothes and vaccination file is not with him.
Considering the submissions of both the parties, I do not find said relief
as considerable at this stage. In the result, the application is liable to be
partly allowed. Hence, the order.
-- 4 of 5 --
5 C. C. No. 317/DV/2018
ORDER
1. The application is partly allowed.
2. Respondent no. 1 shall pay Rs. 6,000/ per month towards
interim maintenance for the applicant and her minor daughter from the
date of the application till disposal of the case.
3. Costs in the cause.
(Imran R. Marchiya)
Metropolitan Magistrate,
Railway Mobile Court,
Date : 24/02/2020 Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 5 of 5 --