Men Rights India

Fight against Legal Terrorism

  • Contact
  • Bare Acts
    • IPC 498A bare act
    • CrPC 125 Bare Act
    • The Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 – bare act
    • Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 Bare Act
  • 498a
    • 498a Tips
    • 498a Info
    • 498a Judgments
  • DV Act
    • DV Act Tips
    • DV Act Info
    • DV Act Judgments
    • Free and Paid eBooks on Law Basics, Maintenance, Divorce, Child Custody, Alimony
  • Maintenance
    • Maintenance CrPC 125 Judgments
    • Maintenance HMA 24 Judgments
    • Free and Paid eBooks on Law Basics, Maintenance, Divorce, Child Custody, Alimony
  • Child Custody
    • Child Custody Visitation Judgments
    • Child Custody Visitation News
    • Free and Paid eBooks on Law Basics, Maintenance, Divorce, Child Custody, Alimony
  • Misc
    • Divorce Judgments
    • Law Misuse
    • Marriage
    • Misandry
    • Sexual Harassment
    • Important Posts
You are here: Home » DV Act Judgments » Delhi Metropolitan Magistrate (MM) court denies interim maintenance under DV Act to wife qualified as beautician

Delhi Metropolitan Magistrate (MM) court denies interim maintenance under DV Act to wife qualified as beautician

6 Aug 2015 By videv 8 Comments

Two readers sent copy of this recent Delhi court’s judgment about interim maintenance, and thanks to both!

👉(Read Online eBook): How to Fight and Reduce Maintenance under CrPC 125 and DV Act 👈

While many people were commenting after reading the newspaper reports of this judgment, I don’t think the newspaper reports mentioned that there was a child who was being taken care of by respondent-husband.  I wonder if the decision had been otherwise had the petitioner-wife been taking care of the child, which is the usual scenario.  In fact, I think that’s the crucial point which has gone in favour of husband/father.

Another possible conclusion: As far as denying maintenance is concerned, better to have a wife qualified as a beautician, than a wife with qualifications like MA or PhD, but no work experience whatsoever.


Important points of judgment below:


ii)  Whether the domestic violence has been committed upon the complainant by the respondents     :Perusal of complaint as well as DIR prima facie show that complainant has been a victim of domestic violence. The allegations and counter allegations leveled  by the parties against each other shall be proved only after leading evidence.

…

(c)  that he does not have any movable, immovable property and investment in his name. He is unemployed and having the responsibilty  to maintain the minor child, who is under his care and custody,

…

6.    It be observed that respondents have not filed any document to prove complainant’s employment and income. Similarly, the complainant has also not filed any conclusive documentary proof except copy of visiting card of Jagdamba Motor Service Station to prove the  employment and income of the respondent no. 1.  It is noticeable that  the name of respondent no. 1 is not printed on the visiting card but his name is mentioned in  someone’s handwriting. The respondent no. 1 has taken the  plea that the name and phone number appearing on the said visiting card,  do not belong to him.  It appears that the claim of the parties in this regard can be proved only by leading evidence. The complainant has admitted doing the course of Beautician, however, she has not furnished any explanation as to why she is sitting idle. In today’s scenario even women are expected to contribute economically in running the house. Admittedly, the complainant is having such professional skill and qualification that she may not find any difficulty in searching a suitable job for herself.    The court is of the view that  the present case is the fit case, where Interim Monetary  Relief should not be granted in favour of the complainant, hence, Interim Monetary Relief is declined.


Full judgment text below:


 

IN  THE COURT OF MS. MONA TARDI KERKETTA: METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
                             TIS HAZARI COURTS : DELHI

CC No. 139/1/13

PS:  BURARI

SMT.  SUMAN                                                            ……..COMPLAINANT

VERSUS

SH.  SANDEEP & ORS.                                                    ………RESPONDENTS

ORDER

1.     By this order,  I shall dispose off Interim Application,  seeking  Monetary Relief

u/s  20 read with  23 of  DV Act of the complainant filed along with the complaint.

The  complainant has not pressed for any other interim relief.
2.      I  have heard Ld. Counsels for the parties  and perused the DIR and  entire case

READ:  Wife not entitled to stay in or claim her father-in-law’s house using DV Act

file with their assistance.

3.     The present proceedings are under Domestic Violence Act, therefore, the Court is

required to consider two important points :

                                                                                     
i)   Whether there is domestic relationship between the parties                     : Admittedly,
respondent no. 1  is  the husband of  the complainant and other respondents are her

in laws and all of them  lastly resided together at the shared household. In view of the

facts and circumstances, domestic relationship between the parties is proved. 

ii)  Whether the domestic violence has been committed upon the complainant by the

                
respondents     :Perusal of complaint as well as DIR prima facie show that complainant
has been a victim of domestic violence. The allegations and counter allegations

leveled  by the parties against each other shall be proved only after leading evidence.

Respondent no. 1 being husband of  complainant,  is legally and morally bound to

 

CC No. 139/1/13  PS: BURARI                            SUMAN VS. SANDEEP & ORS.  1/5

 

 

maintain her as per means and resources available to him, therefore, complainant is

entitled to interim monetary relief  as claimed in the application.

4.       Now coming to Interim Monetary Relief, the complainant has claimed herself to

be a house wife without any source of income and completely dependent upon her
parents.  In respect to  employment and income of respondent no. 1, she has

claimed that  he is  running a service center and  earning Rs. 60,000/­ per month.

She has also claimed that respondent no. 1 has no other liability except to maintain

her. On the other hand, the respondent no. 1 has denied all the contentions of the
complainant and claimed that complainant does not require any maintenance as

admittedly she is a Trained Beautician and working in a Beauty Parlour at Burari and

earning handsome amount of rupees 15,000/­ per month. In respect to his own

income, respondent no. 1 has claimed himself unemployed and dependent upon his
parents for his & minor child’s  maintenance.  He has further claimed that  his name

mentioned in the visiting card  furnished by the complainant is wrong. In fact, the

name Monu is actually of brother in law of respondent no. 2.  The telephone number

mentioned against the said name belongs to someone else.

5.    As per court directions, the parties have filed their detailed income affidavit in
terms   of   judgment   Puneet   Kaur   judgment   from   the   date   of   marriage

wherein,complainant has made the  following declarations :­

                  th
(a)  that she is 8  class pass and  has done Beautician Course before the marriage. She
does not have experience in past occupation,

(b)  that she is dependent upon her parents for the maintenance, who have the

responsibilities of maintaining total  06 family members,  
(c)   that she does not have any movable, immovable properties and investments in

her name and all her stridhan / jeweleries are in the possession of the respondents,

(d)   that she incurs Rs. 1000/­  per hearing on the conveyance, Rs. 100/­ per month as

mobile charges, Rs. 1000/­ per month  upon household expenses,  Rs. 250/­ per
month on medical treatment,Rs.  1000/­ upon  festivals,  Rs. 1000/­ on Birthday

READ:  Live-in like wife, not mistress, to get benefits under DV Act – says Supreme Court

Ceremonies,

 

CC No. 139/1/13  PS: BURARI                            SUMAN VS. SANDEEP & ORS.  2/5

 

 

(e)  that Rs. 6,50,000/­  in the marriage, Rs. 80,000/­  in Kua  Pujan Ceremony were

incurred,

(f)  that she uses public transport for travelling and visits private hospital for the

medical treatment,
(g)   that petition U/s 125 Cr.P.C. and FIR No. 484/14,  PS Burari are pending in the

court. 

        The respondent no.1  has made the following declarations  :­

                   th
(a)   that he is  5  class pass without any professional qualification  and experience of
past occupation,
(b)   that his family consists of total 06 members,  he and his son are dependent upon

his parents for their maintenance, 

(c)  that he does not have any movable, immovable property and investment in his

name. He is unemployed and having the responsibilty  to maintain the minor child,

who is under his care and custody,
(d)  that he incurs Rs.  2,000/­ per month on  household expenses, Rs. 10,000/­ on

legal expenses, Rs.  2000/­ on dependent family members,Rs.  500/­ on festivals and

Rs.  50,000/­ upon the marriage,

(e)  that he belongs to lower class family, travels by foot within the city  and visits

government hospitals for treatment,
(f)  that he and other family members are living in a rented accommodation,

(g)   that  two cases are pending against him.

6.    It be observed that respondents have not filed any document to prove

complainant’s employment and income. Similarly, the complainant has also not filed

any conclusive documentary proof except copy of visiting card of Jagdamba Motor
Service Station to prove the  employment and income of the respondent no. 1.  It is

noticeable that  the name of respondent no. 1 is not printed on the visiting card but

his name is mentioned in  someone’s handwriting. The respondent no. 1 has taken

the  plea that the name and phone number appearing on the said visiting card,  do

not belong to him.  It appears that the claim of the parties in this regard can be

CC No. 139/1/13  PS: BURARI                            SUMAN VS. SANDEEP & ORS.  3/5

 

 

proved only by leading evidence. The complainant has admitted doing the course of

Beautician, however, she has not furnished any explanation as to why she is sitting

idle. In today’s scenario even women are expected to contribute economically in

running the house. Admittedly, the complainant is having such professional skill and
qualification that she may not find any difficulty in searching a suitable job for

herself.    The court is of the view that  the present case is the fit case, where Interim

Monetary  Relief should not be granted in favour of the complainant, hence,

Interim Monetary Relief is declined.

7.      Nothing stated herein shall tantamount to expression on the merits of the case. 
8.       Put up for CE on 29.10.2015.        Complainant is directed to file her affidavit,

advance copy of which be supplied to the opposite party  one week before the next

date of hearing.  It is clarified that only 03 opportunities shall be given for leading CE.

 

Announced in the open Court
on 03.08.2015                                                       (MONA TARDI KERKETTA )
                                                                      MM­02/MAHILA COURT
                                                                THC: Delhi: 03.08.2015

READ:  Allow DV complaints on females in household by removing requirement of “adult male” from definition of respondent - Supreme Court judgment

 

 

CC No. 139/1/13  PS: BURARI                            SUMAN VS. SANDEEP & ORS.  4/5

 

 

                                                                       CC No. 48/1/11
                                                                       PS: BURARI
                                                                       03.08.2015
               Lawyers are on strike today.

Present:­  Complainant in person.
               Respondent no. 1 and 3 in person.

               Other respondents are absent.

               Matter is fixed for clarification/order on the interim application.

               No clarification is required.

 

               Vide separate detailed order, the interim application  of complainant is

dismissed.

               Put up for CE on 29.10.2015.

               Complainant is directed to file evidence by way of affidavit and
documents, if any,  with advance copy to the opposite party a week prior to NDOH

against receiving.  Complainant is further directed to bring  complete documents, if

any,  on the NDOH. It is clarified that only 03 opportunities shall be given for leading

CE.  

                                                   
                                                            (MONA TARDI  KERKETTA)
                                                            MM­02/MAHILA COURT
                                                             THC/DELHI/03.08.2015

 

 

CC No. 139/1/13  PS: BURARI                            SUMAN VS. SANDEEP & ORS.  5/5

Questions about this Article?

Ask in Telegram Group Men Rights India Q&A  (Also include link to this Article when you post question)

👉Free and Paid eBooks on Law Basics, Maintenance, Divorce, Child Custody, Alimony

Related Posts

No related posts.

Filed Under: DV Act Judgments

Comments

  1. Poonam bahl says

    September 16, 2017 at 12:40 pm

    What to do when husband n family forcibally throw u out or tactfully send u home.even if u try to argue they don’t listen to u u keep banging door n tell nebars not to Hlp her.u r crying n crying bt no body comes for ur hlp

    Reply
    • videv says

      September 16, 2017 at 8:59 pm

      You can approach court directly. If neighbours don’t open doors when you bang, it’s difficult to comment on without knowing the situation/context, but it is not a crime on their part. Part of the reason could also be growing awareness of law misuse so people may not want to get involved trying to help strangers.

      Reply
  2. R K Gupta says

    September 13, 2015 at 10:42 pm

    I am Hony President of a social action forum and one of many NGOs to get women laws legislated. The truth is that even today women in most financially empowered harms are assaulted and denied equal rights. Almost every third Indian home a woman is being victimized. Denied maintenance,sexually abused,degraded , physically assaulted and expelled from dwelling unit and that includes wives,sisters and even mothers.
    WE condemn the arrogant and pseudo judicial attitude of magistrates who are making mockery of spirit of this law , in which the magistrate is not only to move fast but dispense complaint within 30-90 days maximum. This act is semi criminal act which aims to bring relief to woman.And was enacted to beat routine delays caused in civil laws. Our Indian judiciary ,politicians and those who laugh at women should feel shamed.This enactment is supposed to be quick remedy and positive legislation but such magistrates and judges are delaying and making absurd comments like why the lady is sitting idle though beautician. Are all PhD getting jobs? Point is the woman has to be provided basic life sustaining facilities including shelter and food and clothing. Period. magistrate is not supposed to make a civil case out of D V act application. Quick relief is essence of this Act.

    Reply
    • videv says

      September 25, 2015 at 8:03 pm

      >>Almost every third Indian home a woman is being victimized. Denied maintenance,sexually abused,degraded , physically assaulted and expelled from dwelling unit and that includes wives,sisters and even mothers.

      In that case, let’s start from your own friends, relatives, extended family. Find out the every third home of your friends, relatives, extended family where this is happening; encourage the degraded, sexually abused, physically assaulted women in these homes of your friends and family; educate these degraded and abused women of their rights; let them file DV cases on male members and get what’s their rightful due. If you are not doing that, then you are one of the male feminists doing the mindless feminist propaganda of (1 in 4 women raped, 1 in 2 women facing domestic violence) etc etc.

      >>making absurd comments like why the lady is sitting idle though beautician

      If it’s considered absurd for an able-bodied man to sit idle, then it should also be considered absurd for an able-bodied woman to sit idle and live life like a parasite.

      Reply
    • sc says

      August 31, 2017 at 11:21 pm

      We are in the 21st century where men and women are equals. Ironically while a man , even if unemployed , has the fear of being jailed if he doesn’t pay maintenance , the wife even after being highly qualified is accepted to sit idle? I think it is time to amend the laws. If I consider myself , I would consider it against my self respect to ask for money from my spouse when I myself am in a condition to work and earn.

      Reply
  3. Nikunj Gupta says

    August 31, 2015 at 9:13 pm

    These cases are really helpful to us. All these cases gives us strength to fight against the fake cases done by our wives. The law is certainly with women but if men has guideline from correct source he can fight .
    And surely it gives us hope and correct way forward.

    Regards
    Nikunj Gupta

    Reply
  4. arvind kumar arya says

    August 8, 2015 at 10:56 am

    very nice.

    Reply

Trackbacks

  1. Ambala, Haryana court denies interim maintenance under DV Act to woman who left child with husband - Men Rights India says:
    November 22, 2015 at 7:56 pm

    […] I see this judgment in line with another recent one where interim maintenance was denied to a wife qualified as beautician.  I think the main thing in both judgments that the child of couple was staying with father, […]

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Call Men Rights India numbers For 498A/406/Dowry Case/DV/Maintenance/child custody-visitation/abusive-wife/false cases, CALL volunteers' phone lines:

👉Kannada/ Hindi/ English: Call Sharath +919738010456
👉Free guidance (10-15 min)
👉Paid Guidance (For 30 min or more), click to pay

Join our WhatsApp/Facebook groups

Join Our Telegram Channel for FREE updates

Social

Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
Instagram

Search this website

Important/Must Read/Permanent Posts

  • How to assess your false case and marriage breakup probability
  • How to take action against police or magistrate for 498A arrest without following CrPC 41 41A?
  • Why Indian men should be very careful in filing divorce
  • What to do if CAW cell/police/advocate is putting pressure to compromise
  • Innocent until proven guilty is the law, use it!
  • Advice to men on 498a, maintenance, DV, divorce, child custody, what else
  • How to find and manage your lawyer in 498a, DV, CrPC 125, divorce, RCR cases
  • How to fight false cases of DV, Maintenance, CrPC 125, 498a etc
  • How to assess maintenance amount likely to be ordered in CrPC 125 or HMA 24
  • Notes and questions on court procedures
  • What should be my stand in court?
  • Understanding the divorce industry in India


Take Quizzes to test your legal knowledge!

Book: How to Fight and Reduce Maintenance under CrPC 125 and DV Act


👉(Read Online eBook)👈
(Buy Print book)
(Buy Digital eBook)
(Information about the Book)

Contribute via UPI: videv@upi / videv@icici / videv@paytm

Today’s Popular Posts

  • How to fight false cases of DV, maintenance, CrPC…
  • How to complain against judges of trial courts, High…
  • Procedure of CAW (Crime against women) cell,…
  • How to handle allegation of impotence by wife
  • Basic Cross-examination techniques in matrimonial…
  • Email addresses of prominent journalists and newspapers
  • IPC 498A bare act
  • How to Fight and Reduce Maintenance under CrPC 125…
  • Advice to women on IPC 498a, DV case, maintenance,…
  • 6 month child custody in an year to both father and…

Tags

498A Activism Arrest Child Support Child_Custody_Visitation Commando Gyan Commando Strategy Commando Techniques CrPC CrPC 125 Cruelty Divorce Domestic Violence Industry Dowry DV Act Judgments Evidence False Case False Rape Family Law Feminazis Feminist Figures Feminist Propaganda Fight Back HC Judgment Hindu Marriage Act HMA 24 Law Making Law Misuse Laws Legal Info live-in Maintenance Marriage Men Rights NCW NRI Police Press Release PWDVA(DV Act) Rape RTI SC Judgment Supreme Court WCD Women Reservation Bill

The Benefits of Reading Men Rights India!

before reading MRI
Before


after reading MRI
After

email: I am facing false DV case. I love your blog. It really have me boost to fight this case and I feel so happy that you guys are doing such a commendable work.


comment: Your survey is 100 % true. whatever is written in this blog matches more than 90 % of my marriage life situation.


comment: The Article is really great, it’s actually happening in my life. whatever is mentioned here is the tactics are used by my wife and still going on….


comment: This is a very good article, and some points mentioned here are the real reasons males are threatened to shell out the maintenance amount


comment: This document is very help for me,becoise i am sufring for false dowry case and fiting for them.so thank for to u.


comment: The web content is very useful for its diversity and especially for atrocities committed upon men, emitting a clarion call for them to rise and defend their rights and hood.


comment: Thanks you People doing very may allah grant you Success. Ameen.


comment: This is very helpful. Thanks a lot. Your work is really a morale booster..
Search judgments at Bharat Law
Read judgments at Bharat Law
IPC 498A Judgments
IPC 406 Judgments
DV Act Judgments
CrPC 125 Judgments
Child Custody Judgments

Author on Facebook

Vivek Deveshwar

Free eBook: Surviving the Legal Jungle

Surviving-the-Legal-Jungle-Cover-Image

Featured Posts

Will feminists ask for equal opportunities in such deadly jobs?

11 May 2010 By videv Leave a Comment

Have a short marriage, and screw husband for life!

12 Feb 2010 By videv 1 Comment

Delhi High Court does historical justice to women by invoking the constitution

23 Mar 2010 By videv Leave a Comment

Supreme Court judgment which says Indian women will not lie about rape

3 Jan 2010 By videv Leave a Comment

Evidences evaluation in divorce on cruelty grounds

11 Mar 2010 By videv Leave a Comment

Equality for Men – Myth or Reality?

Download IMD handbook
Download IMD handbook

Recent Comments

  • Rajesh on Advice to women on IPC 498a, DV case, maintenance, divorce etc.
  • DHAVAL JOAHI on Visitation rights – 1
  • videv on Procedure of CAW (Crime against women) cell, counselling/mediation etc
  • videv on Complaint against male abuse in Asian Paints Damp Proof advertisement -advertiser advised by ASCI to modify or remove it
  • Gurpreet Singh on Procedure of CAW (Crime against women) cell, counselling/mediation etc

RSS Feeds

  • All Posts
  • DV Act Judgments
  • Maintenance CrPC 125 Judgments
  • 498A Judgments

Archives

Copyright © 2009-2021 · Vivek Deveshwar · Privacy Policy
  • Contact
  • Bare Acts
    • IPC 498A bare act
    • CrPC 125 Bare Act
    • The Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 – bare act
    • Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 Bare Act
  • 498a
    • 498a Tips
    • 498a Info
    • 498a Judgments
  • DV Act
    • DV Act Tips
    • DV Act Info
    • DV Act Judgments
    • Free and Paid eBooks on Law Basics, Maintenance, Divorce, Child Custody, Alimony
  • Maintenance
    • Maintenance CrPC 125 Judgments
    • Maintenance HMA 24 Judgments
    • Free and Paid eBooks on Law Basics, Maintenance, Divorce, Child Custody, Alimony
  • Child Custody
    • Child Custody Visitation Judgments
    • Child Custody Visitation News
    • Free and Paid eBooks on Law Basics, Maintenance, Divorce, Child Custody, Alimony
  • Misc
    • Divorce Judgments
    • Law Misuse
    • Marriage
    • Misandry
    • Sexual Harassment
    • Important Posts