Interim Order 1

Pdf Text: 1 C. C. NO.363/DV/2018
Vijayalaxmi Guranna Kumar .... The petitioner
Vs
Sandeep guranna Kumbar & Ors. .... The respondent/s
ORDER BELOW INTERIM APPLICATION U/SEC 23 OF THE PROTECTION
OF WOMEN FROM THE DOMESTIC VIOLANCE ACT, 2005
1. Vide interim application dated 04.12.2018 petitioner mother
claimed interim relief/s. Heard Ld counsels appearing on behalf of both
the parties. I have perused the record.
2. Petitioner is the mother of respondent No.1 & 3. Respondent
No.2 & 4 are daughtersinlaw of her. The relationship between the
party is not disputed.
3. Respondent No.1 in person in his own handwriting submitted
reply & strongly opposed the adverse allegations levelled against him.
Respondents No.3 & 4 submitted reply dated 28.06.2019.
4. During the course of arguments both the parties admitted that
the shared household came to petitioner mother from her deceased
husband. It is admitted that both the parties are presently residing in
the shared household.
5. According to respondent No.1 previously he was involved in
filmset activities but he left that profession/job in 2008, due to his some
own problems. Respondent No.1 has contended that now he works as a
Courier boy and earns Rs.200/per day. He has placed on record
income certificate issued by competent authority showing that his yearly
income is Rs.60,000/. According to him, his monthly income comes to
Rs.5,000/pm.
-- 1 of 3 --
2 C. C. NO.363/DV/2018
6. So far as, income of respondent No.3 is concern, in his reply in
para No.12 it is admitted that his current income is 35,000/(pm).
Perusal of record it shows that petitioner lady could not bring any
convincing documentary evidence regarding monthly income of
respondents. Therefore, this court will have to decide said point by
relying on pleadings of the parties and by doing guesswork.
7. From application, it appears that on 17.04.2018 petitioner lady
had submitted complaint before police wherein it is admitted that one
another room is standing on her name. Apart from that agricultural
land situated in their native village is also on her name.
8. Perusal of record does not show whether respondent No.1 and 3
are having alternative houses for their families except the shared
household.
9. The application is supported by the affidavit of petitioner lady,
therefore on the basis of it, primafacie it can be inferred that she is
subjected to domestic violence.
10. For the purpose of this interim application, it is to be seen that,
both the parties have levelled allegations/counter allegations against
each others, those will have to be decided after recording evidence in
the main matter.
11. So far as, quantum of maintenance is concern, there are two
ends. One is to award the same from higher side, the other one is to
award it from the lower side. However, in my humble view, court has
to strike balance between the said both the ends and to award
justifiable/reasonable interim maintenance.
12. Consequently considering peculiar facts, circumstances, along
with liabilities & evidence etc of the parties, I proceed to pass following
-- 2 of 3 --
3 C. C. NO.363/DV/2018
order in the interest of justice :
O R D E R
1. The petition stands allowed, partly.
2. The respondent No.1 shall pay Rs.2,000/p.m towards
interim maintenance etc to the Petitioner mother from the date of this
application.
3. The respondent No.3 shall pay Rs.4,000/p.m towards
interim maintenance etc to the Petitioner mother from the date of this
application.
4. Respondents are hereby restrained from causing any sort of
domestic violence to the petitioner lady in any manner.
5. Parties are at liberty to submit application for referrring
matter to the Mediation, for amicable settlement.
6. The above observations are preliminary in nature, the same
may vary during the final judgment, subject to proposed evidence.
7. Copy of this order be given to the parties free of costs vide
Sec.24 of the Act.
8. Petitioner mother is at liberty to show copy of this order
before the concern Protection Officer/PSO, as and when required.
9. Prayer to issue directions against respondents to vacate
residential household will be decided at the time of final judgment on
merits.
Sd/
Dt : 29.06.2019. ( S.C. Pathare),
Metropolitan Magistrate,
65th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
ask
-- 3 of 3 --