High Court Kerala High Court

V.Mohammed Ashraf vs P.Ummakulsu on 21 November, 2008

Kerala High Court
V.Mohammed Ashraf vs P.Ummakulsu on 21 November, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Crl.MC.No. 49 of 2008()


1. V.MOHAMMED ASHRAF,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. P.UMMAKULSU, D/O.P.KUNHALI HAJI,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.SUNIL V.MOHAMMED

                For Respondent  :SRI.MANJERI SUNDERRAJ

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :21/11/2008

 O R D E R
                           R. BASANT, J.
                 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                   Crl.M.C.No. 49 of 2008
                 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
           Dated this the 21st day of November, 2008

                              O R D E R

The petitioner is aggrieved by an order directing payment

of amounts under Section 3 of the Muslim Women (Protection

of Rights on Divorce) Act. The learned Magistrate had directed

payment of a total amount of Rs.3,29,900/- The court of revision

upheld the order in so far as it relates to an amount of

Rs.3,05,900/- as shown below.

                                         Trial court        Revisional court

Fair and reasonable provision            Rs.18,400            Rs. 18,400

Default Mahar                            Rs.24,000                Nil

Mahar                                    Rs.20,000            Rs. 20,000

Maintenance during iddat period          Rs. 4,500            Rs. 4,500

Amounts appropriated                     Rs.75,000            Rs.75,000

Gold ornaments to be returned          Rs. 2,08,000           Rs.2,08,000

————————————

Rs.3,29,900 Rs.3,05,900
=====================

2. It is submitted at the Bar that the petitioner was not

given reasonable opportunity to substantiate his contentions. An

Crl.M.C.No. 49 of 2008
2

amount of Rs.2,00,000/- has been remitted before the court as per

interim order on 6.11.2008. The learned counsel for the respondent

also submits that proper amount has not been awarded under the head

fair and reasonable provision, at any rate.

3. Be that as it may, in the course of discussions there is an

agreement between the parties that the impugned orders can be set

aside and the learned Magistrate can be directed to dispose of the

matter afresh, subject to conditions. I am satisfied that such agreement

between the parties can be accepted and this Crl.M.C. can be allowed.

4. In the result:

a) This Crl.M.C. is allowed in part.

b) The amount of Rs.2,00,000/- which is already deposited

before the court below shall forthwith be released to the claimant/

respondent.

c) The learned Magistrate shall dispose of M.C. 9 of 2001 afresh

after giving the parties further opportunity to substantiate their

respective contentions.

Crl.M.C.No. 49 of 2008
3

d) The parties shall appear before the learned Magistrate on

9.12.2008. The learned Magistrate shall dispose of the matter afresh as

expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months

from that date. Whatever be the final decision in the case, the

respondent shall not be liable to return the amount of Rs. 2 lakhs which

is ordered to be released to her.

e) The learned Magistrate shall decide the question afresh

unfettered by any directions already issued or upheld by the revisional

court.

f) The attachment of property in furtherance of the execution

proceedings shall continue till the entire amount payable after orders

are passed afresh is paid and discharged.

(R. BASANT)
Judge
tm