Mohammed Riyaz Shaikh v. Amit Shaikh & Ors.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
The petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to prefer a
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 22. The petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to prefer a statutory appeal. We make it clear that we have not examined the merits of the matter and all issues and contentions raised in the petition will be available to the petitioner for…
Judgment
Smt. Safia W/o Mohammed Riyaz Shaikh & Ors. .. Respondents Mr.Firoz Ansari for the petitioners Mr.A.S.Gadkari, A.P.P. for the state CORAM : J. N. PATEL & A.A. SAYED, JJ DATE : 11TH NOVEMBER, 2009 P.C. :
By this petition, the petitioner husband is impugning the judgment and order dt.9.9.09 in C.C. No.101/N/2008 passed by the learned single Judge in the court of Metropolitan Magistrate, 51st Court, Kurla, Mumbai under the provision of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act,
2005. Against the impugned order the petitioner has a remedy of preferring an appeal under section 29 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 which lies before the court of Sessions within thirty days from the date on which the order made by the Magistrate is 2 served on the aggrieved person or the respondent, as the case may be, whichever is later. Therefore, we are not inclined to entertain this writ petition as the petitioner has approached this court by-passing his statutory remedy available to him under the said Act of 2005, for which no justification is made out.
Operative part
The petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to prefer a statutory appeal. We make it clear that we have not examined the merits of the matter and all issues and contentions raised in the petition will be available to the petitioner for being agitated in the appeal. Petition stands dismissed accordingly. ( J. N. Patel, J) (A.A. Sayed, J)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to prefer a
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 — s. 29.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 11 Nov 2009. The bench was A A SAYED.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.