The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, particularly regarding the procedure for obtaining reliefs, the power of the Magistrate to grant relief under Section 22, and the court's discretion in awarding compensation and other reliefs based on the evidence and circumstances.

MD. MUMTAZ KHAN, J.

1. The instant revision has been preferred by the petitioner/husband assailing the judgment and order dated September 17, 2015 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Birbhum in Criminal Appeal No.34 of 2013 dismissing the appeal.

2. The facts leading to the instant revision, in brief, are as follows:

Opposite party no.2/wife filed an application under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as PWDV Act, or Act, 2005) against the husband namely the petitioner, her brother-in-law and sisters-in-law before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate seeking reliefs under Sections 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22 of the said Act. It was registered as Misc. Case No. 129/2010 and notices were issued. In consequence to the said notice only petitioner/husband appeared and contested the said application by filing written objection. Both parties adduced their respective evidences and thereafter, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate after hearing both parties allowed the application of the opposite party no.2/wife directing the husband, the petitioner herein, to pay a maintenance allowance @ Rs.15,000/- per month to the wife, the opposite party no.2 herein, till his retirement and thereafter @ Rs.8,000/- per month under the provision of Section 20 of the PWDV Act and also a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-(rupees five lakh) as compensation to her under the provision of Section 22 of the PWDV Act with further direction upon the petitioner/husband to arrange alternative accommodation to the wife/opposite party no.2 under the provision of Section 19 of the PWDV Act within local jurisdiction of Bolpur measuring not less than 750 sq. ft. with reasonable amenities for living therein and the rent thereof not exceeding Rs. 5,000/- per month excluding the electricity charges. A protection order in view of the provision of Section 18 of the PWDV Act was also passed in favour of the opposite party no.2, permanently restraining the petitioner/husband from entering into the said tenanted house and perpetrating any act of domestic violence upon the opposite party no.2/wife either himself or by aiding or abetting the commission thereof and also restrained him from keeping any contact whatsoever either personally or by any sort of oral, documentary, electronic or telephonic contact.

3. The said order was directed to take effect from the date of the judgment i.e. from June 27, 2013.

4. Being aggrieved by the same, petitioner /husband preferred appeal before the learned Sessions Judge, Birbhum being Criminal Appeal no. 34 of 2013 and the learned Sessions Judge after hearing the parties declined to interfere with the order of the learned Magistrate with regard to the maintenance order granted under Section 20, alternative accommodation with specification and the amount of rent granted under Section 19, protection order granted under Section 18 of the PWDV Act but enhanced the amount of compensation granted under Section 22 of the Act to Rs.6,00,000/-(rupees six lakh) with a direction that entire arrear amount to be paid within 4 months from the date of the order and the amount of Rs.6,00,000/-(rupees six lakh) to be paid in 5 equal installments in 5 consecutive months.

5. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the same petitioner/husband has preferred the instant revision assailing the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Sessions Judge.

6. Mr. Ayan Bhattacharya, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner/husband, submitted that petitioner's only grievance is with regard to alternative accommodation and compensation granted under Sections 19 and 22 of the PWDV Act respectively and not against the maintenance order granted under the provision of Section 20 of the PWDV Act.

7. According to Mr. Bhattacharya, for granting compensation under Section 22 of the PWDV Act a separate application is required and as there was no such separate application for grant of compensation learned Magistrate was not