MOHAMED IBRAHIM Vs. RAMZAN BEGUM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is averred in the petition as follows :

(2.) The petitioner herein married the respondent on 19-8-1992, subsequently, he divorced the respondent by pronouncement of 'Talaq' on 2-10-1987. Thereafter, the respondent filed a petition under Sec. 3(2) of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, hereinafter referred to as, 'the Act' in M.C. No. 13 of 1990 on the file of Judicial Magistrate VI, Tirunelveli against the petitioner and prayed for a fair and reasonable provision towards maintenance during the period of Iddat' and return of the Mahr amount quantified in the sum of Rs. 20,000.00, restoration of jewels valued at Rs. 33,000/, repayment of the amount of Rs. 10,000.00 and restoration of the utensils and articles valued at Rs. 10,000.00all alleged to have been given at the time of her marriage and for Rs. 50,000.00 towards the further maintenance. Learned Judicial Magistrate-VI, fixed the maintenance amount for the period of 'Iddat'. viz., three months, at the rate of Rs. 500.00per month amounting to Rs. 1,500.00 and made an award for the payment of Rs. 1,000.00 after making deduction of Rs. 500.00 already paid. The claim of the respondent towards Mahr amount of Rs. 20,000.00 was rejected and the same was quantified in a sum of Rs. 201.00. The said amount was also paid by the petitioner herein. Learned Judicial Magistrate further ordered that the respondent is not entitled to any provision towards further maintenance. However, the learned Judicial Magistrate ordered directing the petitioner herein to pay a sum of Rs. 53,000.00 to the respondent towards the value of the jewels, household utensils and cash paid during the time of marriage. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner herein preferred Crl. R.C. No. 111 of 1992 before this Court, but the said Revision Petition was dismissed by the Court. It is also stated by the petitioner, that the respondent filed Crl. M.P. No. 847 of 1992 before the learned Judicial Magistrate-1, Tirunelveli, praying for a direction to pay the value of the jewels and other articles to her. The petitioner herein filed his counter and contested the said petition. Learned Judicial Magistrate passed orders on 19-8-1992 and directed attachment of the properties belonging to the petitioner to sell the same and realise the amount. Learned Judicial Magistrate issued warrant to the above effect. The petitioner submitted further that the warrant was sought to be executed through the Inspector of Police, Ambattur. In view of the coercion exercised against the petitioner, he paid a sum of Rs. 25,000.00 by way of demand draft dated 21-9-1992 drawn on Bank of India, Palayamkottai Branch. Aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate VI, Tirunelveli in Crl. M.P. No. 847 of 1992 dated 19-8-1992, the petitioner has filed the present petition before this Court praying to quash the said order.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted two points, viz., that as per Sec. 3(d) of the Act, the Court can order only delivery of such properties given to the wife before or at the time of marriage or after her marriage by her relatives or friend or the husband or any relatives of the husband or his friends, and that the Court has no power to order repayment of the value of such properties. It was further submitted that as per Sec. 3(4) of the Act, there is no provision at all to enable the Magistrate to issue a warrant for recovering the amount, in lieu of jewels and other articles given to the wife at the time of marriage and that in the absence of any provision, enabling the Court to issue a warrant for levying the amount, in lieu of the value of jewels, household articles, utensils etc., the warrant issued by the learned Magistrate, is illegal and invalid and the same has to be quashed.