• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to footer

Men Rights India

Fight against Legal Terrorism

  • Contact/Help
  • 498A
  • CrPC 125
  • DV Act
  • How-to
  • Child Custody
  • Law
  • Learn
  • Misc
You are here: Home / DV Act / Ambala, Haryana court denies interim maintenance under DV Act to woman who left child with husband

Ambala, Haryana court denies interim maintenance under DV Act to woman who left child with husband

November 22, 2015 by videv

Basically, 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, so the usual sympathy for mother as well as need for child support being paid to mother did not arise.

Though such situations where child is left with father are somewhat rare, the main point to understand is there is no such rule that “you will have to pay some maintenance to wife” – a convenient quote often made by lawyers.  Maintenance will be decided based on details and merit of the case.


Full judgment text below:


                       Seema Vs Kudeep Kumar and others.

In the Court of Ms.Neha Nohria, Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate,
Naraingarh.

Case No.25-2 of 2014.
Date of Instt:18.9.2014.
Date of Order:22.9.2015.

Seema D/o Sh.Ram Nath w/o Sh.Kuldeep Kumar, House No.21, Ward
No.8, Naraingarh, District Ambala.
                                                             …Petitioner/applicant.

                            Versus.

1.      Shri Kuldeep Kumar son of Sh.Ram Naresh,

2.     Sandeep Kumar son of Sh.Ram Naresh,

3.     Ram Naresh son of Sh.

4.     Nirmala Devi wife of Ram Naresh,

       all  residents of village Tehi, Post Office Darajpur, Police Station
       Thana Chhappar, District Yamuna Nagar.

5.     Karamjeet Kaur wife of Sh.Ravi Kumar.

6.     Ravi Kumar son of not known, both residents of village Sherpur,
       P.O.Chhachharauli, District Yamuna  Nagar.
                                                                   …..Respondents.

                     Complaint under Section 12,18,19 of the Protection of
                     Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

Present :     Sh.Munish Bakshi, counsel for petitioner.
              Sh.Hemant Bindal, counsel for respondents no.2 to 6.
              Sh.Pankaj Bindal, counsel for respondent no.1 .

Order on interim relief:

              Applicant/petitioner has come up with the averments that her
marriage  with respondent no.1 was solemnized on 16.1.2013 at Chawla

Palace, Naraingarh according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. At the time

of marriage, sufficient dowry articles were given. However, on the day of

marriage,   all   the   respondents   raised   demand   of   Swift   car   and

Rs.10,00,000/- in cash before Phere ceremony in the pandal. But due to

intervention of the close relatives of parties, marriage was solemnised.

However, after marriage, all the respondents again raised  their demand

 

                       Seema Vs Kudeep Kumar and others.

 

of Swift car, Rs.10,00,000/- cash and gold ring for respondent

no.2(Devar). Even jewellary of applicant/petitioner was   taken by

respondent no.1 and  4. It is averred that  after complainant became

pregnant, respondents enhanced their maltreatment and harassment and

gave beatings to her. On   8.10.2013, all the respondents hatched a

criminal conspiracy and abused complainant, gave her slaps,fist blow ad

kick blows on face, leg and  chest due to which  health of complainant

became detoriated . On the next day when blood started oozing,

respondents no.1,2,4 and 6 got her admitted in  Shri Rishiram Hospital,

Model Town, Yamuna  Nagar. Respondents told doctor  that they are not

having money for treatment. Complainant informed her parents who

came in the hospital with  money. On 9.10.2013, she gave birth to a male

child who was  much weak. It  is averred that when complainant and her

child came home from hospital, respondents again started  demand of

swift car, ten lac and gold ring. On  22.10.2013 on the festival of

Karwachoth, all the respondents misbehaved  with  the complainant. On

2.11.2013, all the respondents again raised their demand of swift car, ten

lac and gold ring. On 11.11.2013 all the respondents  gave beatings to

complainant  in a room. Her father came and  respondents  turned out the

complainant and her minor child from the matrimonial home.  Panchayat

was convened and due to intrvention of the respectables,  the complainant

and respondent no.1  filed a divorce petition with mutual consent under

section 13B of HMA. First statement was recorded  and case was fixed

for recording  of second statement for 10.9.2014.  It is averred that on

3.9.2014, respondent no.1 came in the parental home of complainant  and

raised demand of Rs. 5,00,000/- for giving second statement. On

5.9.2014, respondents no.1,4 and 5 came and again repeated their

demand. On 10.9.2014, respondent no.1 stated in the Court that he made

first statement under  some pressure .Therefore, petition under section

13B HMA was  dismissed. It is averred that  complainant/applicant is

aggrieved person and has been subjected to  domsestic violence  at the

 

                       Seema Vs Kudeep Kumar and others.

 

hands of respondents.  Respondent no.1 is drawing salary of Rs.45000/-

per month as he is serving as Officer  in a factory under the name and

style of Polypack at Yamuna Nagar.  Therefore, she is entitlted to interim

maintenance at  this stage.

2.            Upon notice, respondent no.1 appeared and  filed reply in

which he denied  averments/allegations with regard to demand of dowry

by him and his family members. He stated that marriage of petitioner with

him  was very simple marriage and only some  customery gifts  were

exchanged between both the families. Respondent no.1 and complainant

are living separately from the rest of his family in a rented house. It  is

denied that demand of 10,00,000/-, swift car and gold ring  etc was made

by him or his family members.  It is averred that  the complainant and her

family members are very sharp minded persons and  they want to grab

money from respondents. Complainant was admitted in the morning of

9.10.2013 by the respondent no.1 in Rishi Ram Memorial Hospital in

Model Town, Yamuna Nagar because of labour pain due to premature

delivery complications. She gave birth to a male child on the same day by

caesarean  surgery and all the expenses of delivery /treatment were borne

by respondent no.1. It is averred that  the child was born in 8th month

due to which  he was premature and  required special care/treatment.

Hence, he was shifted to Chaitanya Hospital, Chandigarh. Respondent

lived with complainant with full care, love and affection  but the attitude

of complainant and her family members was not good towards

respondents. It is averred that on 14.11.2013  father of complainant called

respondent no.1 to his house at Naraingarh. When he reached there,

family of complainant misbehaved with him by  saying that  he has not

given any facility to  their daughter. In the night, her father, brother and 10
other relatives alongwith some strangers came to his house armed with

dangerous weapons  and started quarrelling with him and took away
complainant and her premature baby forcibly. It is further averred that  on

14.11.2013 to 6.3.2014, he was not allowed to meet his infant premature

 

                       Seema Vs Kudeep Kumar and others.

 

baby and was forced  to give mutual divorce. A compromise was then

executed between parties on 6.3.2014. It is admitted that petition under

section 13B of HMA was filed under pressure of  complainant’s family

and complainant received  Rs.1,00,000/- from respondent no.1 in the

Court as alimony and remaining  Rs.1,00,000/- was to be paid at the time

of recording second statement in the Court. No medical treatment to child

was given by complainant  and her parents. When custody of premature

baby was given to respondent no.1, his condition was critical and Harnia

Surgery was advised. On 9.9.2014, the date on which second statement  in

divorce petition was to be recorded, complainant and    respondent no.1

jointly patched up the matter and complainant executed affidavit that she

will not file  any complaint/petition or any other application against the

respondent and custody of minor child will also be given to respondent

no.1. No demand of Rs.5,00,000/- was raised. It is denied that  respondent

no.1 is drawing salary of Rs.45000/- per month. It is averred that

complainant is  M.A.-Hindi and was working as teacher before marriage

in Shivalik International School, Naraingarh. She is running a boutique

and is not in need of  money. With these submissions, it is prayed that

petition be dismissed with costs.

3.            In separate reply filed by respondents no.2 to 6 they had

reiterated the averments made by respondent no.1 in his reply.

 

4.            Learned   counsel   for   petitioner/applicant     argued   that

petitioner is aggrieved lady  within the ambit of Domestic Violence Act as

she has been  harassed mentally and physically by all the respondents

under criminal conspiracy. Since she was forcibly thrown out of her

matrimonal home, she is presently dependent upon her parents. Therefore,

at this stage, respondent no.1 is liable to pay her maintenance as well as

expenses  for the rental accomodation.  Per contra, learned counsel for

respondents refuted the arguments of learned counsel for petitioner and

contended that respondents always treated the petitioner with love and

 

                       Seema Vs Kudeep Kumar and others.

 

affection. It was applicant/complainant whose behaviour  was not good.

Even her parents abused respondent no.1. It is then argued that  premature

child is being taken care of respondent no.1 as  his custody is with him. It

is also argued that petitioner has herself left the  minor child who being

very weak remains ill. Hence,  she is not entitled to any relief at this stage.

5.            I have heard rival contentions of learned counsel of parties

and have gone through the case file carefully.

6.            After hearing the rival contentions of learned counsel for the

parties and careful perusal of case file, position that transpires is that

relationship between parties  is admitted . Marriage of applicant/petitioner

with respondent no.1 was solemnized on 16.1.2013 and a male child was

born out of the said wedlock. It is also admitted that  said child remains ill

and was premature at the time of his birth. The allegations leveled by

complainant against respondents are that  they have treated her with
cruelty by raising demand of dowry, gave beatings to her and

subsequently turned her out of matrimonial home on 14.11.2013.  On the
contrary, respondents have also stated that applicant/petitioner use to

harass them  and even took Rs.1,00,000/- as settlement in  the shape of

alimony after executing compromise and affidavit  in this respect. They

have also asserted that  complainant  merely wants to grab money from

them as she alongwith her father left the matrimonial home on

14.11.2013. Meaning thereby, both the parties have leveled  allegations

and   counter allegations  against each other. These assertions by parties

require evidence to prove the same. At this stage, it is admitted that  a

petition under section 13B HMA was filed  which was subsequently

dismissed   as respondent no.1 backed out from   the same and

Rs.1,00,000/- was given at that time to the petitioner.  Moreover,  at that

time, custody of minor child who was born premature and remains ill was

given to  respondent no.1. It further implies that  liability upon respondent

no.1 at this stage is far more than upon the complainant with regard to

 

                       Seema Vs Kudeep Kumar and others.

 

care of minor child. That apart, parties have  been living separately since

14.11.2013 as has been admitted by them. So, allegations qua  domestic

violence  require enquiry in the shape of evidence.Therefore, at this stage,

without appreciation of evidence, it is not appropriate to pass any interim

order.

7.            Accordingly,   present   application   is   hereby   dismissed.

Needless to state, this order shall have no bearing on the final merits of

the case.

Pronounced:22.9.2015.                                   (Neha Nohria)
                                                        SDJM/Naraingarh.

Note :  This order comprises of six pages and all the six pages have been
checked and signed by me.

 

vandna.                                                 (Neha Nohria)
                                                        SDJM/Naraingarh.
                                                        22.9.2015.

 

                       Seema Vs Kudeep Kumar and others.

 

Present :     Sh.Munish Bakshi, counsel for petitioner.
              Sh.Hemant Bindal, counsel for respondents no.2 to 6.
              Sh.Pankaj Bindal, counsel for respondent no.1

              Arguments on application under section 23 of the Protection

of Women from Domestic Violence Act,2005 for grant of interim relief

heard. Vide separate order of even date, application has been  dismissed.

Now case  is adjourned to 21.10.2015 for evidence of applicant at own

responsibility.

 

                                                        (Neha Nohria)
                                                        SDJM/Naraingarh.
                                                        22.9.2015.

Filed Under: DV Act Tagged With: DV Act Judgments, Interim Maintenance

Footer

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)

Join Free Q&A Group on Telegram

You can support author via UPI: [email protected] / [email protected] / [email protected]
Important Articles / Posts

My Books

Copyright © 2009-2023 · Vivek Deveshwar · Privacy Policy  (Disclaimer: For Educational Use Only)

Our website uses cookies to provide you the best experience. By continuing to use our website, you agree to our use of cookies.