REHANA MUSHTAQUE TEMREKAR Vs. MUSHTAQUE YUSUF TEMREKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petition is filed by the wife challenging order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil & Sessions Court, Greater Mumbai in Criminal Appeal No.137 of 2021, by which the order passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate on 06/03/2021 in Criminal Case No.11/DV/2019 is set aside.

(2.) The petitioner-wife instituted proceedings for domestic violence by pleading that her marriage with the respondent was solemnized on 16/05/1994 in accordance with the Islamic Law and, after the marriage, she started to cohabit with her husband in her matrimonial home. However, on account of discord, she instituted proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (for short, "the D.V. Act"), but on the respondent offering a settlement, she withdrew the proceedings under the D.V. Act filed by her before the Family Court at Bandra. Under the said compromise, they started residing together, but as there was a neglect on the part of the husband, she moved an application under Sec. 23 of the D.V. Act, claiming interim maintenance of Rs.10,000.00 per month for herself and a rent of Rs.25,000.00 along with interim compensation of Rs.5.00 lakhs.

(3.) The application was contested by the respondent-husband by denying the domestic relationship and it was specifically stated that he divorced the petitioner, way back in the year 1997 through a Kazi, as per the Muslim Shariyat Law and, since then, he is residing separately and the petitioner is residing with her father on the given address. He submits that an amount of Rs.1,50,000.00 was paid by him towards settlement of previous proceedings instituted vide Application No.110/DV/2015 under the D.V. Act. In the wake of the rival pleadings and also considering the contentions of the respondent-husband that he has no source of income to pay maintenance to his wife, as he does not have any permanent job, the learned Magistrate, after referring to various authoritative pronouncements, where despite separation of the husband and wife, the maintenance came to be awarded to the wife under the D.V. Act, allowed the application and directed the respondent to pay interim maintenance of Rs.7,000.00 per month from the date of filing of the application. The maintenance towards the daughter was denied since she attained majority. The prayer for interim rent or alternative accommodation as well as interim compensation was, however, rejected.