Bangalore District Court
Smt. M. Kommi Bhavani vs Sri Kommi Ravichandra @ Ravi on 16 December, 2017
IN THE COURT OF THE METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE
TRAFFIC COURT - IV, BANGALORE
PRESENT: GAYATHRI.S.KATE, B.com, LLB.,
MMTC - IV, BANGALORE
DATED : THIS THE 16th DAY OF DECEMBER 2017
Crl.Misc.No.68/2016
PETITIONER: Smt. M. Kommi Bhavani,
W/o. Sri Kommi Ravichandra @ Ravi,
Age: 28 years,
R/atNo.621, 2nd Block,
Siddarth Nagar,
Peenya Plantation,
Jalahalli West,
Bengaluru - 560 015
VS.
RESPONDENT: Sri Kommi Ravichandra @ Ravi
S/o. Kommi Ramaiah Chowdhary,
Age: 32 years,
R/at Boti Karlapadu village,
Nandipadu Post, Dattaluru Mandala,
Udayagiri Taluk, S.P.S.R. Nellore District,
Andhra Pradesh - 524 230
***
JUDGEMENT
This is a petition filed by the petitioner U/s.12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 seeking relief's U/s.18, 19, 20 and 22 of the said Act.
2 Crl.Misc.No.68/20162. The case of the petitioner in brief is as under:
It is the case of the petitioner that she is the legally wedded wife of the respondent and that their marriage was solemnized on 17-08-2005 at Narrawada Vengamba Devasthanam, Nellore District, A.P. at 02.30 to 03.30 a.m. as per the Hindu Customs and rituals and both of them are the Hindus governed by Mitaksharara and after the marriage, there is no issue. The petitioner further submits that at the time of their marriage, the petitioner's parents had gave a dowry of Rs.3,00,000/- to the respondent and they were also gave one neck chain, two finger rings, one brasslet, one motor bike and 10 sets of quality cloths to the respondent and further at the time of their marriage, the parents of the petitioner was also gave one 15 savaran mangalya chain worth Rs.2,50,000/-, 2 ear buds, 6 gold bangles, 10 sets of silk clothes to the petitioner and according to the customs and traditions, gold ornaments, silver articles and also house hold articles were given to the petitioner, hence the marriage was performed well and respectfully by inviting relatives, well wishers and friends. The petitioner further submits that after the marriage, the petitioner and the respondent were lived together for a period of few months in the respondent's house and afterwards he started showing his true colour and started harassing mentally as well as physically and thereafter all most from the date of the marriage, the respondents and his family members i.e., Smt. Padma, Sri Seenu, Smt. Yengamma and also his family members were ill treated, abused, harassed, blackmailed, insulted and assaulted the petitioner 3 Crl.Misc.No.68/2016 with criminal intimidation, ill will, mensria, malafide intention and also ulterior motive and further they were used to foul, filthy and vulgar language endlessly against the petitioner and the respondent was demanded higher additional dowry of Rs.5,00,000/- to the petitioner and that there and his family members have created reasonable apprehension in the mind of the petitioner and that her life was/is endanger for the reasons best known to the respondent and his family members. The petitioner further submits that at the time of staying in the respondent's house, the respondent and his family members have not provide proper food, cloths, shelter and also medical expenses to the petitioner and further the respondent and his family members have failed and neglected to the welfare of the petitioner completely, though there was / is no any fault on the petitioner's side, because the respondent has another spouse by name Smt. KRishnaveni, the above said acts of the respondent is opposed to the Hindu /moral code and also rules and regulations of the law of the land. It is further submitted that the respondent and his family members have got all habits and the respondent has no sympathy towards ladies. The petitioner further submitted that at the time of living in the respondent's house, the respondent and his family members have given lot of ill treatment, harassment, abuse, blackmail, inhuman behavior to the petitioner. In that regard the petitioner was fell ill and that was caused heavy stomach pain to the petitioner and thereafter ultimately the petitioner got admitted by her parents to the hospital for treatment and thereafter 4 Crl.Misc.No.68/2016 fortunately she recovered from stomach pain and then her parents took the petitioner to their house and after recovery of normal life, the petitioner was return to the respondent's house in order to live and co-habit with the respondent. The petitioner further submits that the respondent was allowed the petitioner to live with him only few days and thereafter the respondent and his family members have again and again give ill-treatment, harassment, torture, blackmailing, insulted and assaulted the petitioner with criminal intimidation, mensria and ulterior motive and further demanded higher dowry from the petitioner and the act and behavior of the respondent was/is inhuman against the petitioner and the respondent and his family members have not providing proper food, clothes, shelter and medical expenses to the petitioner and on so many nights the respondent was made her to sleep outside the house i.e., in front of the respondent's house though in spite of cold weather prevailing in the winter season. The petitioner further submits that in spite of the respondent's intentional ill treatment, harassment, abuse, blackmailing, insulting and assaulting, the petitioner was tried to live in the respondent's house because she is Hindu Married wife, however the respondent completely good by to the humanitarian values and tried to finish the petitioner. In this regard the petitioner's parents, elderly persons, family members, well wishers were made the panchayath in the above said regard but the respondent and his family members were abused, harassed, insulted and tried to assaulted the panchayathdars and also the petitioner's parents with 5 Crl.Misc.No.68/2016 criminal intimidation and also the petitioner's parents with criminal intimidation and also mensria but the said panchayath was fruitless, however with greatest difficulty she was escape and she was informed the same to the respondent's neighbourers and that the respondent's neighbors also advised to the respondent and his family members saying that not to harass, abuse, blackmail, insult and assaulted the petitioner and not to give ill treatment physically and mentally, however all the advises given by the elderly people to the respondent's community and also neighbors became vain and that the respondent has continued his illegal, unlawful, immoral, inhuman and unethical activities and at last he threatened to kill the petitioner. The petitioner further submits that the respondent and his family members were forced to dispossessed her from the respondent's house and forcibly grabbed the 15 savoren gold mangalya chain, 6 gold bangles and valuable clothes and silver articles and also other items of the petitioner, then left with no other option she went to her parents house. In view of the respondent's illegal acts, harassment, blackmailing insulting and assaulting physically and mentally in order to protect her life, she went to her parents house and she lived there till 2008, however in view of the old aged parents also are not in a position to maintain her and she is strictly saying that the respondent was given ill treatment physically and mentally and the respondent was harass the petitioner as he like and up to his satisfaction and that he imposed on her the wounds in her heart which will not be curable and also 6 Crl.Misc.No.68/2016 indelible. Hence now the petitioner comes to the conclusion that it is rightly impossible and also unsafe to live with the respondent and further she is unemployed women and also lay women and she is not earning to ake out her day today lively hood. It is further submitted that it is respondent's moral, ethical and legal duty to maintain the petitioner. The petitioner further submits that the respondent is living with another spouse by name Smt. Krishnaveni. The petitioner further submits that the respondent never changed his attitude and behavior and instead of that started more cruelty towards the petitioner and the respondent bluntly said on the face of the petitioner that he does not want to a non earning / non working wife and the respondent is not willing to take care of the petitioner. In this condition the petitioner was unable to bear the both mental and physical torture of the respondent and the family members of the respondent and thereby forced to stay in the parents house. The petitioner further submits that she is well cultured and came from respectable family but her husband has spoiled her life and career her dreams to lead a life along with her husband, he used to grab the money in the name of marriage, spoil the life of the innocent ladies, he is not ordinary human being, he is in the habit of making false and frivolous allegation against the petitioner, he has all bad habits. It is further submitted that the respondent who is demanding and insisting her and has she expressed incapability to pay the above said amount, he started harassing and humiliating and ill treating the petitioner without any cause or justifiable reasons. The 7 Crl.Misc.No.68/2016 petitioner further submits that she is living under the shadow of her parents but her parents are also refused to made the daily maintenance to the petitioner and the petitioner with greatest difficulty to her livelihood day today and that strictly say she is facing extremely difficulty even to ake out of her day today life. It is further submitted that without job and without supporting her and without stop the mental and physical torture, she became destitute. It is further submitted that the day today life for her part has become a challenge because of destitution and poverty. It is further submitted that she was used to live under constant life threatening situation without proper medicine, healthy food and proper human care which was necessary for normal living. It is further submitted that the respondent has failed and neglected to providing any money for her livelihood and hence he has committed an offence under the domestic violence act 2005. It is further submitted that in the year 06-10-2008, the respondent forcibly took the petitioner herein and left the petitioner in her parents house, now it is submitted that some how or the other, the petitioner's parents provided a shelter in their house till May-2016 and the parents of the petitioner have asked the petitioner to seek accommodation of her own and accordingly some differences arose in between the petitioner and her parents and the circumstances forced her to leave her parents house and now she is houseless and at present she is living in her friends house, since she is unable to adjust huge advance amount and to pay rent if she will seek or search an accommodation for rent in Bangalore city. Now it is further 8 Crl.Misc.No.68/2016 submitted that after throwing from her parents house by her father she became shelter less woman and she requires a house for rent and also an advance to secure the rental house and hence at least she requires rent at Rs.5,000/- to secure a house for rent and an advance amount of Rs.2,00,000/-. It is further submitted that on 02-05-2016 her father forcibly has driven the petitioner to leave the house which she was living with her parents and that from 02-05-2016 time being she is living with her friends house. In the circumstances stated above the petitioner is entitled to get separate residence and also maintenance amount from the respondent, hence the petitioner is claiming monthly maintenance amount of Rs.20,000/- p.m., every month during the petitioner's life time permanently. Hence this petition. The petitioner further submits that the respondent is having 12 acres of wet land &
3 acres of dry land and the respondent has doing class one building contract and he is having commercial crops and he is getting total income more than Rs.15,00,000/- p.a. It is further submitted that in spite of several request / demand of the petitioner, the respondent refused to give her the maintenance amount. The petitioner further submitted that the respondent is capable of paying maintenance amount of Rs.20,000/- p.m. and he is duty bound to pay and maintain the petitioner. The petitioner further submitted that on 20-07-2016 she has issued the legal demand notice to the respondent and calling upon him to pay monthly maintenance amount of Rs.20,000/- p.m. every month during her lfie time permanently and on 23-07-2016 the respondent was received 9 Crl.Misc.No.68/2016 the said legal demand notice but he did not comply nor reply the same. The cause of action arose on 06-10-2008 when the respondent was forcibly took the petitioner and left the petitioner in her parents house and on 02-05-2016 when the petitioner's father forcibly has driven the petitioner to leave the house which she was living with her parents and that from 02-05-2016 time being she is living with her friends house and further on 20-07-2016 when the petitioner was issued legal demand notice to the respondent by speed post and calling upon him to pay monthly maintenance amount of Rs.20,000/- but on 23-07-2016 the respondent was received the said legal demand notice but he has not comply nor reply the same and subsequently thereafter from time to time the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court. As such she prayed for a protection order U/s.18 and residence order U/s.19, monetary relief of Rs.10,00,000/- towards compensation, Rs.10,000/- towards legal expenses and maintenance of Rs.20,000/- p.m.
3. After registration of the case, summons was issued to the respondent and he appeared through his counsel and filed detailed statement of objection denying each and every allegations made against him.
4. In order to substantiate their respective contentions, the petitioner got examined herself as P.W.1 and got marked 4 documents as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.4. The respondent has not led his side evidence. Hence the respondent evidence is taken as nil.
10 Crl.Misc.No.68/20165. Heard arguments on both the sides, perused the petition, objection and available materials on record.
6. The following points would arise for my consideration.
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled for the relief's as sought in the petition?
2. What order?
7. On perusal of materials before this court, My findings on the above said points are as under:
1. POINT No.1: PARTLY IN THE AFFIRMATIVE
2. POINT No.2: AS PER FINAL ORDER For the following REASONS
8. POINT No.1: To file a petition U/s.12 of the Act, it is necessary that the petitioner has to establish two things firstly, she must establish that, the petitioner and respondent or respondents lived or are living together, in a domestic relationship. Secondly, that the respondent or respondents have subjected her to acts of domestic violence. To prove the domestic relationship the petitioner is required to prove that she and the respondents have lived together in a relationship of marriage or in a relationship in the nature of marriage or related by consanguinity or adoption or as family members living together as a joint family. To prove the act of domestic violence the petitioner is required o prove any one or more of the acts committed by the respondent or respondents as contemplated U/s.3 of the Act.
11 Crl.Misc.No.68/20169. In the present case the petitioner got examined herself as P.W.1 and got marked 4 documents from Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.4. The respondent has not disputed the marital status since the respondent has admitted the marriage relationship between the petitioner and respondent is not in dispute and hence the said point is not seriously contested.
10. Ex.P.1 is the marriage photos. These photos establish the fact of the petitioner is in domestic relationship with the respondent. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent being a able bodied man, who is financially sound has neglected her in taking proper care. On perusal of the exhibits this Court is of the opinion that respondent can take proper and adequate care of the petitioner. However, in spite of receipt of notice the respondent has not come forward before this court denying or disproving the allegation made against him in this case by leading his evidence. Hence, at this juncture there are no material furnished before this court to disbelieve the case of the petitioner. If the respondent had taken care of the petitioner he could have certainly put up some defence before this court against the claim of the petitioner. Though the petitioner has not placed on record any complaint or lead oral evidence in relation to the act of Domestic Violence yet the interest of petitioner is to be looked into. Hence, in the absence of evidence in relation to Domestic Violence this court is of the opinion that granting an order of monetary relief to the petitioner would sub serve the ends of justice.
12 Crl.Misc.No.68/201611. The petitioner has sought for a protection order restraining the respondent from committing an act of Domestic Violence. As discussed above there are no evidence to show that an act of Domestic Violence was committed by the respondent. Hence this relief is liable to be declined.
12. The petitioner has sought for a residence order U/s.19 of Domestic Violence Act, directing the respondents to secure same level or alternative accommodation for petitioner. On perusal of materials before this court, there is no evidence placed by the petitioner to prove the level of accommodation she enjoyed while she was residing with the respondent and the shared house hold. Hence the said relief is liable to be declined.
13. The petitioner has sought for monetary relief of Rs.10,00,000/- towards compensation, Rs.10,000/- towards legal expenses and maintenance of Rs.20,000/- p.m. Since, the act of Domestic violence is not specifically proved before the Court, granting of monetary relief would be inappropriate. Hence, the said relief is liable to be declined. But still the respondent being the husband of petitioner, the respondent is liable to pay compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- to the petitioner. Hence, I answer Point No.1 PARTLY IN THE AFFIRMAIVE.
14. POINT No.2: In view of the materials placed before this court, pleadings, depositions and documentary evidence, this court proceeds to pass the following:
13 Crl.Misc.No.68/2016ORDER The petition filed by the petitioner U/s.12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005, is allowed in part.
The protection order U/s.18 of Act is hereby rejected.
The residence order U/s.19 of Act is also rejected.
Further the respondent is directed to pay to the petitioner Rs.2,00,000/-
Lakhs (Rupees Two Lakhs) as compensation.
The claim of maintenance for the petitioner is hereby rejected.
No order as to costs.
Office is directed to furnish copy of this order to both the parties at free of cost.
(Dictated to the Stenographer directly on computer, typed by her, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open Court this the 16th day of December 2017).
(GAYATHRI.S.KATE) MMTC - IV, BANGALORE.
ANNEXURE
1) LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE PETITIONER:
P.W.1: Smt.Kommi Bhavani
2) LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE PETITIONER:
Ex.P.1: (4) Marriage photos Ex.P.2: 10 Medical document Ex.P.3: Legal Notice dt.20-07-2016 Ex.P.4: Post Office Receipt and Endorsement 14 Crl.Misc.No.68/2016
3) LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE RESPONDENT:
NIL
4) LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE RESPONDENT:
NIL (GAYATHRI.S.KATE) MMTC - IV, BANGALORE.