RENU SHARMA Vs. M C SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition has been filed under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter shall be referred as Cr.P.C.) for setting aside the order dated 02.02.2015 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and for restoring the order dated 10.10.2014 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate. Vide order dated 10.10.2014, the learned MM directed the respondent-husband not to dispossess the petitioner-wife out of the matrimonial house No.B-I/102, Milan Vihar Apartments, Patparganj, Delhi under Section 19 of the Prevention of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (PWDV Act). The learned ASJ reversed the order of the learned MM vide order dated 02.02.2015 and directed the petitioner-wife to vacate the said house and shift to house no.101, Trilok Apartment, Plot No.85, I.P. Extension, Patparganj, Delhi.

(2.) The facts in brief are that a complaint under Section 12 of the PWDV Act was filed by the petitioner-wife against her husband/respondent and others. During the pendency of the said complaint, an application under Section 19(1)(a) & (d) and 20(1)(d) read with Section 23(1) of the PWDV Act for restraining the respondents from dispossessing the petitioner-wife from house no.B-I/102, Milan Vihar Apartments, Patparganj, Delhi was moved. The said application was allowed by the learned MM vide order dated 10.10.2014 directing the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the said house. The respondent-husband challenged the said restrain order by filing an appeal. The appellate Court vide order dated 02.02.2015 directed the petitionerwife to shift to house i.e. 101, Trilok Apartment, Plot No.85, I.P. Extension, Patparganj, Delhi. The respondent-husband was directed to make payment of Rs.50,000/- towards shifting of house and also to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month to the petitionerwife till the final disposal of the case. Feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the appellate Court, the present revision petition has been preferred by the petitioner-wife.

(3.) Arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties were heard.