Bangalore District Court
Smt.M.Chaitra vs Sri.T.M.Subramanya @ Mani on 27 January, 2016
IN THE COURT OF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE
TRAFFIC COURT-VI, BENGALURU CITY.
Crl.Mis.No.119/2013
Dated: This the 27th day of January, 2016.
Present : Smt. LAVANYA H.N. B.Sc., LL.B.,
Presiding Officer of M.M.T.C-VI.
Petitioner : Smt.M.Chaitra
D/o. N.Mallikarajuna,
Aged about 20 years,
R/at # 14/1, Nandanavanam,
'A' Street, Jogupalya, Ulsoor,
Bengaluru.
V/s
Respondent : Sri.T.M.Subramanya @ Mani
S/o Sri.Muthuraj,
Aged about 26 years,
R/at Toobagere Village,
Doddaballapura Taluk,
Bengaluru Rural District.
Also working as :
Driver at South Fire Force Station,
Gen.K.M.Kariappa Road,
Bengaluru-560 025.
JUDGMENT
The Petitioner has filed petition U/s 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter it is referred as Domestic Violence Act) seeking various relief/s under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act.
2 Crl.Mis.No.119/2013The brief facts of the petitioner's case are as under:
2. The petitioner is wife of respondent and their marriage was solemnized on 04.12.2011 at S.R.R.Kalyana Mantapa, Banaswadi, Bengaluru. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent is working in Fire Force Department, Government of Karnataka. He has been introduced by his colleague Ganesh as it was informed that the respondent is a very good person and des not have any bad habits and he and his family members are financially well placed and well-cultured, the parents of the petitioner have agreed to marry, though the petitioner was studying undergraduate course. During the marriage negotiations, the respondent and his family members agreed to allow the petitioner to continue her studies and also agreed to allow her to do job if she gets job and also agreed to relocate to the Bengaluru. As they agreed the conditions put forwarded by the petitioner and her parents, the marriage was solemnized on 04.12.2011. The marriage was solemnized in grand scale by satisfying the demands of the respondent and his family members.
3. After the marriage the petitioner joined the respondent at his native place Toobagere Village. She was happy for a few days. Thereafter, the respondents started telling that the gold neck chain is getting caught in his hair and bracelet is of less weight. As per the demands of the respondent, her parents purchased new design gold neck chain as well as gold bracelet 3 Crl.Mis.No.119/2013 which is more weight. Within three days from the date of purchase of the Bracelet and chain the respondent pledged the same. When the petitioner questioned the same, he said that it is his property she should not question about the same. The respondent has got bad vices like consuming alcohol. He is maintaining the family of his sister and her family in his house and borrowed loan. Hence he is under great financial stress. As such he has been demanding gold ornaments worn by her to satisfy his vices. He is also telling her to give her gold ornaments and dresses to his sister. When petitioner refused to heed the demands of the respondent, he and his mother started harassing her, by not allowing her to talk with anybody and not providing timely food to her. They did not show any love and affection towards her. They are also sending her to bring water from a distance of 1 and 1/2 Kilo meters away from their house.
Mother of the respondent started giving pinpricks by harassing the petitioner stating that the respondent will not come to Bengaluru to lead life with her and he will come only if she gets a house under mortgage or otherwise get the half portion of the property registered in the name of the respondent. Accordingly, mother of the respondent and respondent demanded the petitioner's father. When her father sought time for complying the same as he is under financial difficulties for which they stated that immediately arrange the house by mortgaging their property or otherwise they will send the petitioner to her parents house and created a big scene at the petitioner's parents house.
4 Crl.Mis.No.119/2013Thereafter, the respondent and his mother abused the petitioner in filthy languages, assaulted and snatched all her gold ornaments which were given at the time of the marriage and also demanded to being Rs.Five lakhs for arranging separate house at Bengaluru and also informed her parents to take back the petitioner immediately, as such mother of the petitioner came to their village and took her to Bengaluru. Though the petitioner thought of lodging complaint against the respondent, she did not lodge complaint as elders convinced her that not to lodge the complaint. Even in the panchayath the respondent and her mother put forth their demands of separate house at Bengaluru or else giving divorce to the respondent for which her parents have requested for some time as they lost valuables in the theft occurred in the house for which the respondent and his mother taunted petitioner and her parents and thereby the respondent has deserted the petitioner on 16.06.2012.
4. It is further case of the petitioner that the respondent used to come to the house of the petitioner by consuming alcohol in the mid-night and used to make galata. The respondent married the petitioner in order to grab the valuable property from her father but not otherwise. From the date of marriage the respondent has not shown any love and affection towards her and has not spent even a single rupee for her. The respondent and his mother collected lakhs of rupees dowry and still they have been demanding for dowry. The petitioner is in 5 Crl.Mis.No.119/2013 the care and custody of her parents as she has no source of income to lead her life. Though the respondent has sufficient source of income, he failed to maintain the petitioner. Upon these grounds, it is prayed to restrain the respondent from committing any sort of Domestic Violence; direct the respondent to provide alternative accommodation for the petitioner as enjoyed by her in the shared house hold or to pay the rent for the same; direct the respondent to pay maintenance of Rs.20,000/- per month and also direct him to pay compensation of Rs.Fifteen lakhs to her.
5. In pursuance of the notice the respondent has put his appearance through Advocate and has filed objection in detail denying the entire allegations made against him and his mother as false except admitting the marital relationship between the petitioner and himself and they lived together in his native place till 16.06.2012. It is specifically contended that on 16.06.2012 the petitioner was taken by her parents from the house of the respondent on the pretext that as there is ashada. During her stay in the matrimonial home the respondent was taking care of her. She never had any grievances against respondent and his parents. Thereafter the petitioner did not return to matrimonial home inspite of several requests made by him. He is the only son for his parents who depending on him who are residing in his village. He is working as Fire Engine Driver in the department of Fire service and he used to travel daily from 6 Crl.Mis.No.119/2013 Doddaballapura to Bengaluru. He has performed his sister's marriage four years back. His sister is independently residing. But, the petitioner was insisting him to abandon his parents and to stay in the house of her parents at Ulsoor, Bengaluru. He is employee and is capable of taking care of his wife and parents and wants to lead respectable life of his own. The petitioner herself deserted him at ill advice of her parents. He has been continuously threatened by her parents. Inspite of her acts and vengeance, he is ready to lead a peaceful life. Hence, he got issued a legal notice, Dated: 04.02.2013. He is also ready and willing to keep her in Bengaluru. The petitioner voluntarily deserted the respondent on the advice of her parents and she does not want to sacrifice rich comforts which she enjoys in her parents' house. The petitioner is working and earning for herself. The respondent has no other source of income except his salary. Upon these grounds, it is prayed to dismiss the application.
6. The petitioner in order to prove her case, she got herself examined as PW-1 and got the documents marked at Ex.P-1 to
16. On the other hand the respondent has been examined as RW-1 and got the documents marked at Ex.R-1 to 5.
7. I have heard the arguments and perused the materials available on record. The following points that would arise for consideration are as under:
7 Crl.Mis.No.119/20131. Whether the Petitioner proves that she has been subjected to Domestic Violence by the respondent?
2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to the relief/s sought for?
3. What Order?
8. The answers to the aforesaid points are as under:
Point No.1 : In the Negative ;
Point No.2 : In the Negative ;
Point No.3 : As per final order for the following :
REASONS POINT No.1:
9. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner is wife of respondent and their marriage was solemnized on 04.12.2011. It is also admitted fact that after the marriage the petitioner was residing along with respondent and his mother till 16.06.2012. From these admitted facts it could be said that there exist Domestic Relationship between the petitioner and respondent as defined under section 2(f) of the Domestic Violence Act.
10. Mere proving Domestic Relationship between the parties would not suffice to grant relief/s under the provision of the Domestic Violence Act. In order to grant relief/s under the 8 Crl.Mis.No.119/2013 provisions of the Domestic Violence Act the petitioner is required to prove that she has been subjected to Domestic Violence by the respondent as defined U/s 3 of the Domestic Violence Act.
11. The petitioner in her examination-in-chief by way of affidavit has reiterated the averments made in the petition. In support of her contention she has relied upon Ex.P-1 to 16. Ex.P-1 is the marriage invitation Card. Ex.P-2 is the receipt for having paid rent to the SSR Kalyana Mantapa wherein the marriage of the petitioner and respondent took place. Ex.P-3 is the receipt for having purchased gold jewels. Ex.P-4 to 7 are the receipts for having purchased provisions and vegetables. Ex.P- 8 is the reply, Dated: 08.03.2013 which was given by petitioner through her Advocate to the respondent's Advocate to the legal notice issued to the petitioner. Ex.P-9 and 10 are the receipts for having sent the reply to the respondent. Ex.P-11 and 13 are the acknowledgments for having receipt of reply sent by the petitioner. Ex.P-13 is the receipt for having paid the amount towards flower decoration. Ex.P-13 is the receipt for having paid the amount towards video and photo. Ex.P-15 is the Cash bill for having purchased Sarees, Ex.P-16 is the Cash bill having purchased provisions.
12. On the other hand the respondent in his examination- in-chief by way of affidavit has reiterated the averments made in his objection statement. In support of his defense he has relied 9 Crl.Mis.No.119/2013 upon Ex.R-1 to R-5. Ex.R-1 is the complaint Dated: 22.11.2013 which has been given by respondent. Ex.R-2 is the Acknowledgment for having receipt of the complaint. Ex.R-3 is the Notice Dated: 04.02.2013 wherein it could be seen that the respondent has issued the notice to the petitioner calling upon her to join with him for leading marital life. Ex.R-4 is the certified copy of the plaint in M.C.No.34/2014. Ex.R-5 is the certified copy of the written statement filed by the petitioner herein in MC.No.34/2014.
13. It is the specific case of the petitioner that the respondent and his mother harassed the petitioner for additional dowry and also demanded to have mortgage house at Bengaluru at the cost of her parents or otherwise get the half of the property in the name of the respondent or otherwise she could not stay in the matrimonial home as such she was constrained to leave matrimonial home on 16.06.2012. On the other hand the allegations made by the petitioner have been denied by the respondent and it is specifically contended petitioner on her own due to Ashada Masa went to her parental home. Thereafter, she did not return to matrimonial home as she refused to stay in his native place along with his parents and the petitioner demanded the respondent to stay with her in Bengaluru. The respondent refused to stay with the petitioner in Bengaluru as he has aged parents who depend on him.
10 Crl.Mis.No.119/201314. PW-1 during cross-examination has clearly admitted that she went to her parental home on 16.06.2012 as there was Ashada. She has further admitted that neither the respondent nor his mother forced her to leave the matrimonial home. This admission on the part of the petitioner falsify her case that the respondent and his mother thrown her away from the matrimonial home on demanding dowry and also getting house at Bengaluru from her parents.
15. It is further case of the petitioner that during Panchayath held respondent and her mother have continued their demand or otherwise have demanded to give divorce. It is to be noted here that in this case the respondent has caused notice calling upon the petitioner to rejoin with him for which the petitioner has given reply stating that she has no interest to lead life with him and she is also stated that if the respondent makes arrangement in Bengaluru by leaving of his attitude, she is ready to live with him in Bengaluru. Petitioner during course of cross-examination has also admitted that she called respondent to Bengaluru. From this fact it is very clear that the petitioner has no interest to lead marital life with the respondent in his native place where his parents are living.
16. It is further case of the petitioner that the respondent has been taking care of her sister family who are staying in the house of the respondent which is denied by the respondent.
11 Crl.Mis.No.119/2013Petitioner during course of the cross-examination has admitted that respondent's sister has been staying along with her husband. From this it is very clear that the allegations made against his sister are false.
17. The petitioner has contended that the respondent has been demanding divorce. At this stage it is relevant to note here that in this case admittedly the respondent has filed MC No.34/2014 seeking restitution of conjugal right and the same has been contesting by the petitioner whereas the petitioner has filed divorce case against the respondent. From this it is very clear that the petitioner has not interested to lead marital life with the respondent. Further it appears that the respondent never demanded divorce from the petitioner as alleged by her.
18. It is further case of the petitioner that she has been physically assaulted by the respondent. In this regard the petitioner has not placed any material to show that she has been physically assaulted by the respondent.
19. It is the first and foremost contention of the petitioner that during the marriage negotiation the respondent and his parents have agreed to send her to college and they have also agreed to send her to job if she gets job and also agreed to make house in Bengaluru which is denied by the respondent.
12 Crl.Mis.No.119/201320. At this stage it is also to be noted here that the petitioner during her cross-examination admitted that she completed her II PUC in the year 2009. Thereafter, she did not pursue her education and she was in home. The marriage was performed on 04.12.2011. From this fact it is very clear at the time of the marriage the petitioner has not been pursuing her education. Therefore, the question of continuing her education does not arise. Apart from that except oral allegations and denial by the respondent, nothing has been placed before the Court by the petitioner that during the marriage negotiation the respondent and his parents have agreed to make house in Bengaluru and also agreed for other conditions stated by the petitioner.
21. On scrutiny of entire evidence placed by the petitioner it prima-facie appears that petitioner has no interest to lead her marital life with the respondent in his native place along with his parents. As such, she refused to join the respondent to lead marital life with him. From this it could be said that she herself left the matrimonial home without any reasonable cause.
22. So far as economic abuse is concerned, it is undisputed fact the petitioner has been living with her parents since 16.06.2012. It is also admitted fact the respondent has not paid the maintenance to the petitioner. No doubt it is the 13 Crl.Mis.No.119/2013 duty of respondent being a husband to maintain his wife, petitioner who has no means to maintain herself. But, it is also the duty of the petitioner being wife to perform her marital obligations. When the petitioner herself deserted the respondent on her own without any cause and staying along with her parents then question of paying maintenance by the respondent does not arise. Therefore, it is held that the petitioner is not subjected to economic abuse as alleged by her.
23. In view of aforesaid discussion it is held that the petitioner has failed to prove that respondent and his mother have harassed the petitioner physically, mentally and economically as alleged by her. Hence, point No.1 is answered in the Negative.
POINT No.2:
24. When the petitioner has failed to prove that she has been subjected to Domestic Violence by the respondent, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief/s sought by her under the provisions of Domestic Violence Act. Hence, Point No.2 is answered in the Negative.
POINT No.3:
25. In view of findings on point No.1 and 2, this Court proceeds to pass the following:
14 Crl.Mis.No.119/2013ORDER The petition filed by the petitioner U/s 12 of The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 is hereby dismissed.
No order has to cost.
(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcript computerized by him, revised, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 27th day of January, 2016) (Smt. LAVANYA.H.N.) P.O. OF MMTC-VI, BENGALURU.
ANNEXURE WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE PETITIONER :
PW-1 : Smt.M.Chaitra.
DOCUMENTS EXHIBITED FOR THE PETITIONER :
Ex.P-1 : Marriage Invitation Card,
Ex.P-2 : Kalyana Mantapa bill,
Ex.P-3 : Jewellery bill,
Ex.P-4 to 7 : Bills,
Ex.P-8 : Reply,
Ex.P-9 -10 : Postal receipts,
Ex.P-11 - 12 : Postal acknowledgments,
Ex.P-13 : Flowers decoration bill,
Ex.P-14 : Video bill,
Ex.P-15 : Clothes bill,
Ex.P-16 : Provision bill.
15 Crl.Mis.No.119/2013
WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE RESPONDENT:
RW-1 : T.M.Subramanya.
DOCUMENTS EXHIBITED FOR THE RESPONDENT:
R-1 and 2 : Complaint & acknowledgment,
R-3 : Legal notice,
R-4 and 5 : CC of Petition and objection in MC No.34/14.
P.O. OF MMTC-VI, BENGALURU.