IMPORTANT POINT
Maintenance orders under the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act can be enforced through attachment of both movable and immovable property.

JUDGMENT :

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) :

Since common questions of facts and law are involved in both these revisions, they are heard together and are being decided by this common judgment.

2. In Criminal Revision No.544 of 2023, the challenge is made to the following:-

i. Order dated 17.07.2023, passed in Misc. Criminal Case No.14 of 2018, Smt. Vibha Negi vs. Saurabh Negi and others, by the court of Judicial Magistrate, Kotdwar, District Pauri Garhwal, whereby the application moved by respondent no.1 under Sub Rule (5) of Rule 6 of the provisions of the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Rules, 2006 has partly been allowed.

3. In Criminal Revision No.545 of 2023, the challenge is made to the following:-

i. Order dated 17.07.2023, passed in Misc. Criminal Case No.22 of 2019, Smt. Vibha Negi vs. Saurabh Negi and others, by the court of Judicial Magistrate, Kotdwar, District Pauri Garhwal, whereby the application moved by respondent no.1 under Sub Rule (5) of Rule 6 of the provisions of the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Rules, 2006 has partly been allowed.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

5. The respondent no.2 (“the applicant”) filed an application under Section 12 of the Protection Of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 inter alia seeking maintenance from the revisionist, which was basis of Misc. Criminal Case No.97 of 2013, Smt. Vibha vs. Saurabh Negi and others in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kotdwar District Pauri Garhwal (“the case”). The case was decided on 27.09.2016. The court issued various directions including payment of Rs.40,000/- maintenance amount. Order 27.09.2016, passed in the case was unsuccessfully challenged by the revisionist in Criminal Appeal No.78 of 2018, Saurabh Negi vs. Smt. Vibha Negi, in the court of Sessions Judge, District Pauri Garhwal (“the appeal”).

6. Both the judgments and orders passed in the case and in the appeal were challenged by the revisionist in Criminal Misc. Application No.366 of 2019 (“the petition”) before this Court. On 14.03.2019, while admitting that petition the Court had stayed the operation of the impugned order subject to the revisionist paying Rs.30,000/- per month as maintenance. The petition filed by the revisionist was finally dismissed on 23.12.2022.

7. The applicant filed an application for execution of order of maintenance for the period beginning from 27.09.2016 till 12.02.2018. The application for recovery was registered as Misc. Criminal Case No.14 of 2018, Smt. Vibha Negi vs. Saurabh Negi and others.

8. For recovery of arrears from 19.02.2018 till 27.03.2019, the applicant’s application for recovery of maintenance was registered as Misc. Criminal Case No.22 of 2019, Smt Vibha Negi vs. Saurabh Negi and others. Both these Misc. Cases were decided by the impugned orders. They have been challenged in these two revisions.

9. Learned counsel for the revisionist would submit that :-

a) The order granting maintenance was passed by the Magistrate court, which was confirmed in appeal was challenged in the petition. On 14.03.2019, this Court has ordered for interim maintenance of Rs.30,000/-per month. Therefore, from 14.03.2019, when the order for grant of interim maintenance of Rs.30,000/- per month was awarded, till the petition was decided on 23.12.2022, the revisionist is liable to pay the maintenance @ Rs.30,000/- per month only; and

b) In the recovery proceedings, the movable property alone may be attached, immovable property cannot be attached, in view of Form 19 of the Schedule of the Code.

10. It is argued that in the instant case, in the execution proceedings, the house of the revisionist has been attached, which cannot be done. It is bad in the eyes of law.

11. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that interim order passed in the petition on 14.03.2019 has merged in the final order dated 23.12.2022. It is argued that the order of maintenance awarded by the court of Magistrate in the c