Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Narendra Kumar Vyas, J.
Abdul Hanif @ Bablu S/o. Abdul Hafiz – Appellant
Versus
Smt. Tarannum Bano, D/o. Sheikh Galib Kuraishi - Respondent
First Appeal No. 183 of 2008
Decided On : 19-07-2022
Streedhan - Dissolution of Muslim Marriage - Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939, Section 15(8); Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, Section 3 - Section 3(1) of the Act provides protection to the divorced women. Section 3(2) specifically provides that where a reasonable and fair provision and maintenance or the amount of mahr or dower due has not been made or paid or the properties referred to in clause (d) of sub-section (1) have not been delivered to a divorced woman on her divorce, she or any one duly authorised by her may, on her behalf, make an application to a Magistrate for an order for payment of such provision and maintenance, mahr or dower or the delivery of properties, as the case may be. The court's decision was influenced by the provisions of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939 and the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. The court emphasized the rights of a divorced woman to a reasonable and fair provision and maintenance, as well as the return of properties given to her before or at the time of marriage.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiff filed a Civil Suit under Section 15(8) of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939, seeking divorce and return of gifts received at the time of marriage. The trial court granted the divorce and directed the defendant to return the gifts to the plaintiff.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the defendant failed to return the gifts received by the plaintiff at the time of marriage, which was in violation of the provisions of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939 and the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986.
Issues: The issues included the demand of dowry, failure to provide maintenance, and the return of gifts received at the time of marriage.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the defendant's failure to return the gifts received by the plaintiff at the time of marriage was in violation of the provisions of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939 and the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and directed the appellant to return the gifts to the respondent within a period of two months.
JUDGEMENT :
1. This is first appeal under Section 96 CPC against the judgment and decree dated 10.01.2008 passed by learned the District Judge, North Bastar, Kankar (CG) in Civil Suit No. 2-A/2007, by which the Civil Suit filed by the plaintiff under Section 15(8) of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939 has been allowed and the marriage solemnized between the appellant and the respondent has been declared as null and void. Learned trial Court by impugned judgment and decree has directed the appellant to return the gifts which have been received by the relatives of the respondents at the time of marriage within two months.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be referred to in terms of their status as shown in Civil Suit No. 2-A/2007.
3. Brief facts as mentioned in the plaint are that the marriage between the plaintiff and the defendant was solemnized on 19.05.2004 in village, Jaisakarra, Tehsil Charama, District Kanker (CG). After the marriage, the plaintiff was residing with her matrimonial house at Durg. It is contended that there was demand of dowry by the husband and from his family members. It is further contended that the appellant demanded Rs. 50,000/- for purchasing washing machine, CD player and for constructing the house. It is further contended that respondent was victimaized by the family members of appellant which has caused apprehension in her mind with regard to her life and safety as during pregnancy she was compelled to leave the matrimonial house. It is further contended that on 18.09.2004 an agreement was executed by the appellant before the witnesses that he will not harass his wife and the family member of the appellant has also assured that they will also not harass her and in view of their assurance the respondent come back to her matrimonial house at Durg. But again the appellant has started beating her, therefore, the respondent left the matrimonial house. It is further contended that the appellant has failed to perform his duty without reasonable cause and has failed to provide her maintenance which has compelled the respondent to file decree of divorce.
4. The appellant has filed the written statement, denying the allegation made in the application contending that there was illicit relationship between respondent and other person. It has also been contended that there was no matrimonial relation between the appellant and the respondent, still a child was born on 21.02.2005, therefore, a doubt was created over the character of respondent in such a situation it is not possible for the respondent to live with the appellant and threatened him to commit suicide as such he informed to Mahila Thana Durg on 30.06.2006. on 24.07.2006, the appellant has also moved an application before Mediation Centre, Durg for bring his wife back to matrimonial house, therefore, the respondent is not entitled to get any relief and would pray for dismissal of the application.
5. On the pleadings of the parties, trial Court has framed as many as five issued. The plaintiff to substantiate her case has examined Nandlal Sahare (PW-1), Shatruram (PW-2), Tarunnum Bano (PW-3), Shekh Galib Kuraishi (PW-4) and Kunwarpal Singh (PW-5) and exhibited document Nikahnama (Ex.P-1), Agreement (Ex.P-2), List of gifts (Ex.P-3), Registered Notice (Ex.P 4), Postcard (Ex.P-5), receipt (Ex.P-6), Prescription slip (Ex.P-7), Prescription slip (Ex.P-8). The defendant to substantiate his case has examined Abdil Hanif (DW-1), Jahira Bee (DW-2), Parveen Shekh (DW-3) and exhibited documents complaint (Ex.D-1), Mediation report (Ex.D-2).
6. The plaintiff witnesses have reiterated averment made in the plaint, and they have specifically pleaded about the return of Streedhan which was given by the relatives of the plaintiff at the time of marriage exhibited as Ex.P-3 list of the gifts. Learned trial Court after appreciating the evidence, material on record has allowed the application filed by the plaintiff and granted decree of divorce as well
The main legal point established in the judgment is the obligation of the defendant to return the gifts received by the plaintiff at the time of marriage, as mandated by the provisions of the Dissolu....
Monthly maintenance – Under Section 3(2) of Muslim Act, 1986, a divorcee can file application before Magistrate if her former husband has not paid to her a reasonable and fair provision and maintenan....
Point of Law : Muslim Women Protection Act - Liability under Section 3 - Husband cannot be fastened with liability to continue to pay the maintenance under Section 125 of Cr.P.C till the wife invokes....
A divorced Muslim woman is entitled to reasonable maintenance under the Muslim Women Act, and cannot claim double benefit from both the Act and Section 125 Cr.P.C.
Divorced Muslim women can claim maintenance under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. regardless of prior agreements made under personal law.
The court affirmed that a divorced Muslim woman is entitled to reasonable and fair maintenance during and beyond the iddat period, reflecting her future needs and the husband's capacity to pay.
The judgment clarifies that divorced women are entitled to maintenance under both the MWPRD Act and Section 125 Cr.P.C., ensuring their financial security post-divorce.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
