MD. NAZIMUDDIN Vs. MUSTT. MONOWARA BEGUM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the order, dated 28.6.1994, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate. 1st Class, Nagaon, in M.R. Case No. 241/91, under Sec. 3(1) of the Muslim Women's Protection of Rights on Divorce Act, 1986, hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1986" read with Sec. 125 Cr.PC.

(2.) The facts giving rise to this revision may, in brief, be stated as follows : The O.P. filed a petition under Sec. 3(1) of the said Act claiming an amount of Rs. 15,000 as Meher (Dower) from the 1st party along with maintenance allowance for the period of Iddat amounting to Rs. 1,660, recovery of Dowry articles valued at Rs. 1,250 and maintenance allowance for her minor daughter @ Rs. 300 per month, the case of the 1st party being, briefly stated, thus : 1st party was legally married wife of the Second Party. The Second Party dissolved the marriage by giving her 'talaque' and drove her out of her matrimonial home along with her said minor daughter. The meher was fixed at the time of marriage at Rs. 15,000 and dowry articles worth Rs. 1,250 were given in her marriage. Though the 2nd party has pronounced 'talaque', he has not made payment of the Meher 'amount nor has he made payment for the value of the dowry articles received by him. The 2nd Party has also not given any maintenance to their said minor daughter.

(3.) The Second Party contested the proceeding contending, inter alia, that there was no marriage between the parties and hence, question of dissolving the marriage by pronouncement of 'talaque' did not arise. Notwithstanding this categorical denial of marriage, Second Party's case, eventually, projected was, in brief, thus, 1st Party and her father, late Nazar Ali had concealing the fact, at the time of marriage that the 1st Party was three months' pregnant on the night of the marriage itself. On the discovery of this fact. 1st Party was sent to her paternal house and she got herself aborted. Thereafter, 1st Party refused to live with 2nd Party and started quarreling with him. 1st Party was allowed to go to her paternal house on her own request and since then, she has not come back to 2nd party's house. The 1st Party is not entitled to payment of any meher, maintenance allowance for iddat period, recovery of value of the dowry articles and/or maintenance allowance for her said minor daughter.