BRUNDABAN PATRA Vs. RAJALAXMI PATRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners being the opposite parties in I. A. No. 29 of 2011, arising out of C. P. No. 480 of 2011 of the Court of Judge, Family Court, Bhubaneswar assailed the order dated 4.3.2011 restraining them from interfering with opposite party's possession of a portion of the building and also directing them to allow use of electricity and water supply to the portion occupied by the opposite party in this case.

(2.) THE facts leading to file of this writ petition are undisputed. The opposite party is the daughter -in -law of the petitioners. The husband of the opposite party died leaving behind the opposite party and her infant daughter. The opposite party has been in occupation of the first floor of the building over revenue Plot No. 1328, Mouza -Kapilaprasad in Bhimtangi area under Bhubaneswar Tahasil where she has been residing along with infant daughter. She filed an application before the learned Judge, Family Court under section 23 (2) of the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' read with sections 18, 20 and 22 of the said Act on the allegation that after death of her husband the opposite parties, i. e. , the present petitioners subjected her, to cruelty to evict her from the building. They disconnected the electricity and water supply connections to the floor under her occupation on 15.1.2001 and they forced her to evict that part of the building.

(3.) AFTER taking into consideration the pleadings of the parties and the affidavit filed, the Trial Court was satisfied prima facie that the present opposite party, i. e. , petitioner before the Trial Judge is the wife of late Dr. Somanath Patra. son of the present petitioners. The opposite parties being the daughter -in -law and her child, being the grand daughter of the petitioners. have been in occupation of the house of their own right. However, the Trial Court has observed that the present petitioners have threatened to dispossess them by disconnecting the electricity and water supply connections. However, the electricity and water supply was continued in the ground floor and the 2nd floor without any disruption. Hence, finding disconnection of supplies to be intentional with an ulterior objective of evicting the opposite party, the Trial Court ordered that the electricity and water supply be restored and in case of necessity the name of the consumer be changed to that of the present opposite party by the authorities in charge of supply of water and electricity.