High Court Karnataka High Court

Smt Zeenat Kausar vs Waheed Ahmad on 21 April, 2009

Karnataka High Court
Smt Zeenat Kausar vs Waheed Ahmad on 21 April, 2009
Author: H.N.Nagamohan Das
IN THE HIGH covm or xAm~IA*rA;m  " 
cmcurr amen AT  '  F'
mmn mxs THE 215? ngfi   $30439; " _ 

Im;,1§oRE <.  

THE Horrsw MR. JU8Ti€l§'H.N. HA¢A.!'é.o£i§fi'nAs

cmmzm. msvzamn .si1a§'ri1fi:éjie .xo.152'1 1 

BETWEEN:     'V

E.

Fa)

" END

Sm' ZEE§§IA'?;:jKAUSAR3  '   
w 10 ,;rAm-:3 A.I~.£7AMAQ_ MURAD-- ; ADI
AGED'AI£3OUT 37"YEAF?S',.  s  
0cQ_VsERv1c1a,_VV -  ~  
I210 crs., mi) 38312 1<:'otr'v.IAL GALL:
BELGAIJM   -- -

MAST-ERASIF: _ . _ 
S/0 JAVEI) MMAD MURAEDABADI

" _{AGE'.D Amuf: 17 vgmes

. " KU'MAR1~sHAR1KA
, ' " 1' £3,*0;1AvED_AHMAD MURAEABADI

 A*I'.2%L's;o7."PAsSE1}V.,B:( THE II A1:>1:>L.sJ.,
BELGAUM IN cRL.A.No.1o9'/_m"'%.A§Jp coxmam THE ORDER
z:>'1'.s.4.2oo7 PASSED BY f1fiH g ..JM.F(:g11"""C¢uR1', BELGAUM IN
CRL.MISC.NO.2/0v74_.  '   

THIS P}s:%r1';5té:;;v ' 'CI()'1\'}iI.:l'3(} "(§N  :§F(V)R ADMISSION, THIS

BAY, THE'   ma FOLLGWING:
'    R

vP§;tifi6n¢rs  proceedings under the pmvisions of

lvoi W6'mcn fmm Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for

shu§J::"'.t12e'V'*1§;;~;é; C.Misc.2/07 before the II Court, JMFC,

  Belgafiie... "51;:':ii:s CrI.Misc.2/07, petitioners flied I.A.No.1 for

  foflqwijfig reliefs :

"i] The respondents or any body acting

on their behalf be restrained from interfering in the
exciusive possession of I floor of CTS No.38}?
Kotwal Gaili, Belgaum,

aw»

ii) The respondents or anybody acting*:.on:°’–. l V
their behalf be restrained from interfering
complainants, their workers from ‘l3epen:lte._
tap water oonnection from municipal’ rcorploratlon ‘V l l.
water pipeline in CTS l$&.1,§3812l,”*A_I§lot\val _ 2 3

Belgaum.

iifl) The ree_t}€>’n_den_te or actinglon
their behalf be restraineti ‘rr5ml’i”if;te;§£e§-gag’with the
complainants, their*” ” -w:o’rl<leI'.e_ an lelzecting
iron] steel the 'loft staircase
leading us' :9' :32. '

iv] -. No.1 be directed to
pronede latleaatll per month towards

monthlgfmainteiraanee"out of family shop bearing
,, No. l99"}"'"/V48 Ganapat Galllfi, Belgaum."

both the parties, the JMFC Court

l passed 3_n.u:dle;rlas under;

H x ‘T,”Aeting U/s 23 of Protection of Women from

Domestic Violence Act, 2005;

i} The respondents or anybody acting on
their behalf are hereby restrained from énterfering in

the exclusive possession of I Floor of CTS No.33 ‘ jj .

Kcstwal Galh, Be-lgaum.

ii] The respondents or 4′
their behalf are restrained from inttA§rf¢fi1_1fgwith’v;hé ~ * VV
complainants, their workc:rs’ fx’i;>:;1 taking
tap water cannection from
water pipeline in CTS N038 C%aEli,”‘VV

Beigaum.

iii} _ Ci’ aéhgrbody acting on
their bang: ngrgby }esaf”a*i7r;ed: “imm’;n£errermg with
the .ca2nplé£1né1nié;._;. ‘rtheir’ wofker;-3 from erecting
iron}{stec;f£– gntranée of the staircase

ieadmg. to 41 Fioo;-.o§C51’€~§«~I§¥E5;8w£2.

: ‘ ” i ) V Refgidndéliat No.1 is hereby directed to
;_jno11Vthly méiritenaace of Rs.2,000/~ to
. “eo;np1aina:}is~–. __ from 05.05200’? until further

‘ qr;«:em..?*-~»._ ”

3. ‘ by the order in Cr1.Misc.2/()7, respondent

before the II Add}. Sessions Judge at Belgaum

No.109]2007 and the same came to be disposed vide

datcfi 24.08.2007 setting aside the ortier of the Trial

Court insofar as it relates to grant of interim .

Aggrieved by this order, the petitionergazve before’ ” ” 2

4. Heani arguments .on.__hotnV.g£tie

entire petition papers.

5. it is not in dis,p;;¥icV is the wife
and petifionem;”‘Nog4QV of late Javeed
Ahamad ” the brother of deceased
Javeed question that arises for
my whether the Lower Appellate

Court is éageide the order of the ‘I’ria1 Court

‘ finsofififas; relates” “fine grant of monthly maintenance.

respondent is the brother of Late Javeed

K/fgufiabadi, the husband. of 1°’ petitioner and father

gefieonem No. 2 and 3. Under Section :25 of Cr.P.C., the

__ “‘j«BrAo§:t1’ei*~i11~3aw is not liable to pay the maintenance. Further,

” not in dispute that the 15* petitioner is an LIC Agent and

also Worldng in the Offiee of Joint Diieotor of Karnataka Land

Anny Corporation Limited, Zonal Office, Bclgaum and

income. Therefore under the ci1x:umstanccs,.~«~~’:I:i_c.__iLd:&fé:r

Appellate Court is right in setting aside the .()f:.A’:l.’.’i1f’i: _A

Court insofar as it relates to grant of ‘– . V

7. It is not in dispute: ti3Ei{‘i”fT}CLf:r€ are fiénding V

betwaen the yarties in réspectibf’ 1u}iiaperfiE:éV’of {he famiiy
including business. éhsis’ ssjsisssgegiimest for the

petitioners to fiic invivthc suits pending

before appiifiifiiiate relief in mspect of

income business.

Iii’tié:’:’i3r”Vto the petitioners to workout their

cases that are pending between the parties,

this is iiemby rejected. Ordcmd accoxtlingly.

Sd/-s
Iudfif