Lorry Driver’s wife files DV, gets 6000 p.m. So… women’s lib has reached all sections !! Jai Hind !!

Lorry Driver’s wife files DV, gets 6000 p.m. So… women’s lib has reached all sections !! Jai Hind !!

* template DV, template cries and complaints. in fact some of the claims are so similar to the other case I posted today, one would be confused as to which case he / she is reading !! šŸ™‚ šŸ™‚
* In this case wife claims husband earns 25000 p.m., Hon court does NOT accept the same, court re assesses drivers wages at Rs 11000 p.m.
* Hon court refuses many of wife’s claims. Court disputes her medical exp claim as she has provided NO proof
* Hon court refuses order against alienation of assets as list of assets , details NOT provided
* Hon court grants Rs. 2500 for kid and Rs 1500 for wife. wife gets maintenance till her lifetime ! She also gets Rs 2000 p.m. for alternate accommodation (so in all Rs. 6000 p.m.)
* Since wife is living with her parents court also refuses to restrain husband from alienating assets !!

This case highlights how DV cases have reached all rungs of society and there is NO escaping from this menace, whether you are rich or poor

****************************************************************************************

IN THE COURT OF MS. RICHA GUSAIN SOLANKI:
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE (SOUTH WEST)-01,
MAHILA COURT, DWARKA, NEW DELHI

CC No. 952/1/14
PS BHD Nagar
ID no. 02405R0236992014

Smt. Pooja
W/o Sh. Jai Singh
D/o Sh Randhir Singh
R/o RZ 156A, Block R
Dharampura Extn, Najafgarh
New Delhi -110043 …..Applicant

Versus

1. Jai Singh
2. Smt Kailasho devi
3. Sant Ram
4. Mahender
5. Praveen …..Respondents

( All R/o H. No 214, Hari Dass Enclave, near College, Jaroda Kalan Village, ND)

Date of Institution : 15.10.2014
Date of Order : 24.11.2015
Date of Order : 30.11.2015

EX PARTE JUDGMENT

1. Vide this order, I shall decide application u/s 12 DV Act filed by complainant Smt. Pooja against her husband Sh Jai singh / respondent no 1, Kailasho Devi (MIL) / respondent no 2, Sant Ram (FIL)/ respondent no 3, Mahender (BIL)/ respondent no 4, Praveen (BIL)/ respondent no 5.

2. The complainant states that she got married to respondent no 1 on 11.03.2012 and the couple was blessed with a baby girl Riya on 02.02.2013. Complainant states that soon after the marriage respondents started harassing her. On 20.04.2013, respondent no 2, 4 and 5 beat the complainant and threw her out of the matrimonial house. Complainant filed a complaint with PS BHD Nagar but no action was taken. It is also alleged that when complainant gave birth to child, she remained admitted in the hospital for 20 days but none of the respondents ever visited her or paid a single rupee towards the medical expenses. Complainant states that she remained for her parents house for 30 days after the delivery. Complainant alleges that she was harassed and tortured for the demand of Rs 50,000/- and she also gave a complaint with PS Dwarka sec 9 in this regard. The matter was referred to Mediation Centre, Dwarka and was compromised on 03.10.2013 under fear of registration of case. However, complainant was still harassed at her matrimonial house by the respondents and was beaten by respondent no 1. She alleges that respondent no 1 and 4 threatened to kill her but she was saved due to intervention of neighbours and relatives. Complainant states that she is totally dependent on her parents for herself and for the child while respondent no 1 is working as a driver and earning Rs 25000/-pm . It is further stated that respondent no 1 has no liability except to maintain the complainant and the child. http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; https://vinayak.wordpress.com/ ; http://fromvinayak.blogspot.com

Complainant has prayed for protection order u/s 18 DV Act i.e. prohibiting respondents from committing/ aiding / abating any act of domestic violence against the complainant. Further, she has prayed that respondents be restrained from contacting her in any manner or alienating any assets held jointly by the couple or separately by them. She has further stated that respondent be restrained from causing violence through her relatives.

Complainant has prayed for residence orders U/s 19 DV Act I.e restraining the respondents from dispossessing the complainant or disturbing her possession in the shared household, restraining them from alienating the shared household or in the alternative secure same level of alternative accommodation or sum of Rs 8000/-p.m towards rent. She has also prayed that she be given possession of all her jewelery worth Rs 2 lakhs which is with the respondents.

Complainant has also prayed for monetary relief u/s 20 DV Act i.e medical expenses of Rs 3000/-pm, maintenance of day to day needs @ Rs 15000/-pm for herself and for the child. She has further prayed for compensation of Rs 5 lakhs on account of mental agony, harrassment etc .

3. The respondent was duly served and he entered appearance, however, he did not file reply despite repeated opportunities and accordingly he was proceeded ex parte on 23.09.2015.

Evidence In her support complainant examined herself as CW1 and tendered her affidavit in evidence as Ex.CW1. She relied on copy of her complaint dated 02.05.2013 as CW 2, copy of tuition fee card of child Riya as CW 3 and copy of her adhar card as CW4.

Complainant filed her affidavit of assets.

Brief Reasons for Decision and Decision :

Complainant has deposed that she was physically and verbally abused by respondents and in this regard she has relied on her complaint EX CW2, which reiterates similar allegations as made in the present complaint. Respondent has not filed his reply to dispute either the factum of marriage, the birth of child Riya or that the couple were living in a shared household of the complainant. Since the respondents are ex parte, all the averments of complainant remained unrebutted. Accordingly, following orders are passed :

Protection Order :
Complainant has prayed for protection order u/s 18 DV Act i.e. prohibiting respondents from committing/ aiding / abeting any act of domestic violence against the complainant. Complainant has substantiated her allegations of physical / verbal abuse by relying on her complaint which is dated almost 1.5 yrs before filing of the present complaint. Accordingly, complainant is entitled to protection order. Respondents are restrained from committing/ aiding / abeting any act of domestic violence against the complainant. They are further restrained from contacting her in any manner or causing violence through her relatives.

Complainant has also prayed that respondents be restrained from alienating assets but no details have been provided. As such this portion of the prayer is denied.

Monetary Relief

Complainant has also prayed for monetary relief u/s 20 DV Act . She has claimed medical expenses of Rs 3000/-pm but complainant has failed to disclose where she is incurring such expenses. Complainant has not mentioned even once if she or the child are suffering from any health condition as would require a monthly expenditure of Rs 3000/-. This relief is accordingly denied.

Complainant has claimed maintenance of day to day needs @ Rs 15000/-pm for herself and for the child. She has filed her affidavit stating that her monthly expenditure is Rs 20000/-. She has claimed that she is spending Rs 2000/-pm on the school fees of the child and Rs 3000/- pm on the other expenses of the child. She claims that she is spending approximately Rs 9000/-pm on household expenditure apart from other miscellaneous expenditure of Rs 1000/-pm and medical expenses. She claims that she is unemployed while respondents no 1 is earning Rs 30000/-pm as a driver.

Even though, the evidence of complainant is unrebutted, complainant seems to have given an inflated figure for respondent no 1’s monthly earnings as a driver. Taking into account the minimum wages for a skilled labour, the monthly income of respondent no.1 is assessed to be Rs 11,000/-.

Although the monthly school fess as mentioned by the complainant in her affidavit is Rs 2000/- but her own document Ex CW3 reveals that it is Rs 1,000/- per month. Apart from that the monthly misc expenditure of Rs 3000/-pm seems to be inflated keeping in view the status of the parties. Accordingly, it is directed that complainant is entitled to monthly maintenance of Rs 2500/- towards the child and Rs 1500/- towards herself. This amount shall be payable till the marriage of the child Riya and till the life time of complainant respectively.

She has further prayed for compensation of Rs 5 lakhs on account of mental agony, harrassment etc . However, complainant has not explained how she has arrived at this amount. Therefore, this relief is denied.

Residence Order
Complainant has prayed for residence orders U/s 19 DV Act I.e restraining the respondents from dispossessing the complainant or disturbing her possession in the shared household. However, admittedly complainant has been is residing with her parents since Oct 2013. Therefore, there is no question of restraint against her dispossession or disturbing her possession in the shared household.

It has already been observed that complainant has proved that she was verbally and physically abused in her matrimonial house. Further, complainant has been ousted from the matrimonial house, which is in itself sufficient to constitute abuse. As such complainant is justified in living separately from the respondents. She has also prayed that she be provided alternative accommodation of the same level or be given a monthly rent of Rs 8000/-. As per complainant’s own case, she was living in a joint family at her matrimonial house which is her shared household. She has also claimed that her husband is a driver earning Rs 30000/-pm. Seeing such status of the parties, the rent claimed by complainant is not justifiable. In her own affidavit of assets she claims to be spending only Rs 3000/-pm on rent. Therefore, she is additionally entitled to a monthly rental of Rs 2000/- only. This amount shall be payable till the life time of complainant.

Since separate rent has been provided for, no order is passed restraining respondents from alienating the shared household.

Complainant has also prayed that she be given possession of all her jewelery worth Rs 2 lakhs which is with the respondents. However, she has neither described what such property is nor has she mentioned which of the respondents is in the possession of her articles. As such this potion of the prayer is declined.

Application U/s 12 PW DV Act is disposed off accordingly. File be consigned to record room.

ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT

( RICHA GUSAIN SOLANKI )

TODAY ON 30th November, 2015

MM-01(SW), Mahila Court, Dwarka/Delhi

*****************************disclaimer**********************************
This judgment and other similar judgments posted on this blog was / were collected from Judis nic in website and / or other websites of Govt. of India or other internet web sites like worldlii or indiankanoon or High court websites. Some notes are made by Vinayak. Should you find the dictum in this judgment or the judgment itself repealed or amended or would like to make improvements or comments, please post a comment on the comment section of the blog and if you are reading this on tumblr please post responses as comments at vinayak.wordpress.com . Vinayak is NOT a lawyer and nothing in this blog and/or site and/or file should be considered as legal advise.
*******************************************************************************
CASE FROM JUDIS / INDIAN KANOON WEB SITE with necessary Emphasis, Re formatting
*******************************************************************************

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s