AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
J.M. Khazi, J
Being aggrieved by dismissal of appeal filed by him before the Sessions Court challenging the order passed by the trial Court granting maintenance and other reliefs under the provisions of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as 'the DV Act' for short), petitioner/husband is before this Court contending that the impugned order is not the speaking order. False allegations were made in the petition. Due to the intervention of the elders of the family, a settlement is entered into on 03.09.2011 and by virtue of said settlement, permanent alimony is paid. Therefore, question of once again paying maintenance does not arise. However, without providing reasonable opportunity, appeal filed by the petitioner is dismissed.
Notice on this petition is served on the respondent No.1/wife. However, she has not chosen to appear and contest the matter. In fact, notice by hand was also ordered, but respondent No.1 has refused to receive the notice.
Heard arguments and perused the records.
Respondents filed petition under Section 12 of the DV Act, seeking several reliefs. After conducting detailed enquiry, the trial Court partly allowed the petition granting maintenance at the rate of Rs.5,000/- per month to respondent No.1, Rs.5,000/- per month as rent for her residence and Rs.10,000/- is granted by way of compensation.
Challenging the same, petitioner/husband filed Criminal Appeal No.143/2021. However, on 07.08.2023, the Sessions Court dismissed the appeal by observing that despite granting sufficient time, learned counsel for the petitioner herein has failed to address the arguments. Challenging the same, the present petition is filed.
In the light of specific defence taken by the petitioner/husband that a settlement is entered into between the parties and permanent alimony is paid, the matter requires consideration based on merits. From the order sheet of the appeal filed before the Sessions Court, it is evident that several adjournments have been taken. Despite the same, this Court is of the considered opinion that the matter requires remand to the Sessions Court with a direction to dispose of the appeal on merits. Of course, the learned counsel for the petitioner is required to be vigilant and prosecute the appeal without seeking unnecessary adjournment and accordingly, the following:
ORDER
i) Petition is allowed.
ii) Impugned order dated 07.08.2023 passed in Crl.A.No.143/2021 on the file of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Hassan, dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner/husband for non-prosecution is set aside.
iii) Matter is remanded to the Sessions Court for disposal in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunities to both the parties.
iv) Petitioner/husband is directed to appear before the Sessions Court on 06.12.2023.