Delhi District Court
Cc. No. - 474/03 Sahiba Parvez vs . Iqbal Parvez & Ors. on 23 September, 2011
CC. NO. - 474/03 Sahiba Parvez Vs. Iqbal Parvez & ORS.
IN THE COURT OF MS POOJA TALWAR,
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE /MAHILA COURT/
SOUTH EAST DISTRICT/SAKET/NEW DELHI
CC. NO. - 474/03
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Sahiba Parvez
W/o Iqbal Parvez
D/o Sh. B.M. Malhotra
R/o 206-A, Jeevan Nagar, New Delhi
--------------- COMPLAINANT
VS.
1. Iqbal Parvez,
S/o Late Sh. Kafil Ahmed,
R/o 103-A, Gali No. 17, Zakir Nagar,
Okhla, New Delhi-110025
2. Ms. Heena d/o Sh. Kafil Ahmed,
R/o 103-A, Gali No. 17, Zakir Nagar,
Okhla, New Delhi-110025
3. Ms. Nasreen w/o Riyazuddin,
R/o H. no. 56, Basti Nizamuddin, New Delhi
4. Bobby @ Shahbuddin Abbasi, s/o Riyazuddin,
R/o H. no. 56, Basti Nizamuddin, New Delhi
5. Sabana w/o Mohd. Zakir,
R/o 103-A, Gali no. 17, Zakir Nagar, Okhla, New Delhi
6. Rehna Akhtar, w/o Kammal Akhtar
R/o 364, Gali no. 6, Zakir Nagar, New Delhi
7. Kamal Akhtar, s/o Capt. Mohd. Siddiqui,
R/o 364, Gali no. 6, Zakir Nagar, New Delhi
----------------------- RESPONDENT
DATE OF INSTITUTION - 14.01.2010
DATE OF JUDGMENT - 23.09.2011
1
CC. NO. - 474/03 Sahiba Parvez Vs. Iqbal Parvez & ORS.
JUDGMENT
1. This is a complaint filed U/S 12 of PWDVA, 2005. Brief narration of facts relevant for the disposal of the complaint are as under.
2. The marriage of the complainant and the respondent no. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the respondent) was solemnized on 03.05.19995 as per muslim rites and customs at New Delhi. That it was an inter caste marriage however parents of the complainant gifted many articles. That after marriage respondent no. 1 in collusion with other respondents confined the complainant in a room and did not allow her to go outside and also caused physical assault and mental torture. Later on a police complaint was filed and a case was registered as FIR no. 83/02, PS. S.N. Puri, u/s 498/406 IPC which is pending before the court. That respondent no. 1 played fraud with the complainant by publishing his name in the Times of India as 'Parvesh Sharma' and thereby converting himself to Hinduism. Photocopy of the same is Mark X. But later on it was proved false. That the respondent no. 1 later solemnized second marriage to one Ms. Rashima Khan on 02.03.2007 without taking divorce or taking consent from complainant.
3. Reply has been filed by the respondent no. 1/ husband denying all the allegations made in the complaint by stating that the the present complaint is liable to be dismissed on the ground that this Hon'ble 2 CC. NO. - 474/03 Sahiba Parvez Vs. Iqbal Parvez & ORS.
Court has no jurisdiction to try the present complaint as the present act U/s 12 of D.V. Act 2005 which is effective since 2006 has no retrospective effect. That the marriage was a love marriage and the complainant has changed her religion out of her own will. That this was the love marriage so no dowry and jewellery was given or taken by the respondent. That after marriage, brother of the complainant took the complainant to her father's house and did not permit the complainant to go her in-law's house but after getting the opportunity complainant joined the respondent and complained against her brother.
4. Domestic Incident Report has been filed by the Protection Officer as per the statement given by the aggrieved person/complainant as well as the respondent.
5. Evidence was lead by both the parties. The complainant and the respondent examined themselves as the only witnesses. The complainant has reiterated the contents of her complaint in the evidentiary affidavit. She has exhibited certain documents along with her affidavit. She was cross-examined by the respondent counsel wherein she has stated that she is living separately since 2001. She further admitted that interim maintenance u/s 125 CrPC is being granted @ Rs. 2,000/- per month. She denied that respondent has no movable property in UP. She admitted that respondent has rental income from the property.
3CC. NO. - 474/03 Sahiba Parvez Vs. Iqbal Parvez & ORS.
6. In the evidentiary affidavit of the respondent, he reiterated the contents of his reply and exhibited certain documents. He was cross examined by the complainant counsel wherein he has stated that he is residing separately from his wife since 2001. He further admitted that he had filed a suit for restitution of conjugal rights in the yar 2003 in Tis Hazari Courts and the same was dismissed and thereafter, a case u/s 498A/406 IPC was registered against him and his other family members which is still pending. He further admitted that no proceedings of divorce ever initiated between him and the complainant in any court of law. He further admitted that he solemnized 2nd marriage in the year 2007 with Rahima and has one child of above 3 years and he has not obtained any written or oral consent from the complainant for solemnization of second marriage. He further stated that he never received any notice dated 23.04.2007 sent by the complainant regarding solemnization of second marriage. He further stated that his mother in law or second wife have never objected for his act of solemnization of second marriage and he had not committed any offence by solemnizing second marriage without obtaining consent from his first wife/ complainant. He further admitted that he is a passport holder and visited foreign country twice. He further stated that the house belongs to his elder brother. He denied that the said house was in the name of his mother. He stated that his three brothers were in foreign country but now one is in India. He also stated that in the present house apart from him, one of his unmarried sister and two married sisters are living along with their 4 CC. NO. - 474/03 Sahiba Parvez Vs. Iqbal Parvez & ORS.
families. He stated that there are six rooms in total in the said house and his elder brother is occupying the upper portion of the house and presently lying locked. He further stated that the portion in the house were divided according to the will executed by his mother and the house in Nabatkhana, Amroha, UP belongs to his nani and he has no concern with that. He stated that he used to conduct sale of crockery in various parts of the city on tehbazari basis on Tuesday in Okhla, Sahinbagh in Jamia and this is the only source of his income but he did not specifically tell the sale and income he generated from this business. He further stated that he was maintaining vehicle Tata Sumo (white color bearing no. DL 3 C P 9107) and he was also owing a motorcycle bullet bearing no. DL 3 S P 8669 and at presently he is not owning any vehicle. He stated that he is having T.V. Fridge and cooler etc. He further denied that he is earning Rs. 30,000/- per month or that he was not agreed to convert his name as Parvez Sharma at the time of his marriage with Sahiba and he also denied that he has never got published in the newspaper regarding the change of said name.
7. I've heard the ld counsels for both the parties and perused the DIR and all the records carefully.
8. Whether prima facie case of domestic violence is made out?
8.1. On appreciation of evidence, it is revealed that throughout the 5 CC. NO. - 474/03 Sahiba Parvez Vs. Iqbal Parvez & ORS.
cross examination not even a single suggestion has been given to the complainant that no cruelty was committed upon her or that she was not harassed by the respondents. This in itself is an admission on the part of the respondent that cruelty and harassment was committed upon the complainant. Even otherwise complainant has alleged specific allegations against all the respondents. She has narrated the incidents whereby, she was made a victim of domestic violence at the hands of the respondent. The respondent has not been able to disprove the allegations levelled against her. Therefore, a prima facie case of domestic violence is made out against the respondent no. 1 the husband. As regards, other respondents are concerned respondent no. 2 and 5 who are sisters of respondent no. 1 were residing in the shared household along with the complainant at the relevant time and there are specific allegations of cruelty against them. They have neither led evidence nor specifically denied the allegations in the reply which was jointly filed. In these circumstances, prima facie case of domestic violence is also made out against respondent no. 2 and 5.
As regards, respondent no. 3,4,6 and 7, they were admittedly not in domestic relationship with the complainant and were residing separately, therefore, they cannot be arrayed as respondents and proceedings against them are dropped.
9. Relief 9.1 Complainant has averred that respondent is in the business of 6 CC. NO. - 474/03 Sahiba Parvez Vs. Iqbal Parvez & ORS.
crockery and owns a Tata Sumo as well as a bullet motorcycle. He also owns a property at Amroha as well as given 6-7 rooms on rent and is earning a rental income of Rs. 20,000/- per month. The total income of respondent is stated to be 40,000/-.
On the contrary, the respondent has stated that he is a small vendor of crockery and sells crockery in weekly market at few places. The property at Amroha belongs to her matrimonial grand mother. As far as rooms given on rent are concerned, he only earns Rs. 3,000/- to 4,000/- as rent from the said property as the rent for the other rooms is received by his brothers. His income from sale of crockery is Rs. 3,000/- to 4,000/- per month. As far as liabilities are concerned, he has solemnized second marriage and has two children out of the wedlock. Besides this, he has two widow sisters to maintain. He is suffering from heart problems. He is overweight and therefore, unable to work actively. He has stated that complainant is a law graduate and is qualified to maintain herself. In these circumstances, though complainant has admitted to have completed her law, but it is very recently. She was compelled to earn her livelihood. Once she was ousted from shared household. Admittedly, she has completed her law very recently. She will take considerable time to establish her income. Therefore, a maintenance of Rs. 2,000/- is being granted to her, keeping in view the fact that respondent has also to maintain his family.
9.2. As far as the residence orders u/S 19 are concerned, 4,000/- per 7 CC. NO. - 474/03 Sahiba Parvez Vs. Iqbal Parvez & ORS.
month for allotment accordingly is being granted.
9.3. As far as the monetary relief is concerned, complainant shall be entitled to Rs. 4,000/- as rent in case she choses to take premises on rent.
9.4 Further, Rs. 5,000/- as litigation expenses be also given to the complainant by the respondent no. 1.
10. Respondent no. 1 is directed to clear the arrears of maintenance within 3 months from today in equal installments and to furnish the monthly maintenance after the date of order, by way of money order or by deposit in the bank account of the complainant on furnishing of account number of the same, by or before 10th day of each English calender month. The default shall be viewed in terms of the judgment of Hon'ble High Court in Gaurav Sondhi Vs. Diya Sondhi - 120 DLT (2005) 426.
11. Accordingly, the complaint is disposed of.
12. Interim Orders, if any stands vacated.
13. File be consigned to record room.
Announced in the (POOJA TALWAR)
open Court on 23.09.2011 MM/SED/MAHILA COURT/
SAKET/NEW DELHI/23.09.2011
8
CC. NO. - 474/03 Sahiba Parvez Vs. Iqbal Parvez & ORS.
CC no. 474/03
23.09.11
Present: Both the parties with their counsels.
Vide my separate order the case filed under Section 12 of D. V. Act is disposed of.
Accordingly, file be consigned to record room.
(POOJA TALWAR) MM/SED/MAHILA COURT/ SAKET/NEW DELHI/23.09.2011 9