IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 21ST NOVEMBER 2008 / 30TH KARTHIKA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 49 of 2008() ----------------------- CRRP.77/2004 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT-II, KOZHIKODE MC.9/2001 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, KUNNAMANGALAM .................... PETITIONER(S): COUNTER PETITIONER --------------------------------- V.MOHAMMED ASHRAF, S/O.M.K.MOIDEEN HAJI, KATTAYATTUPOYIL, NR. PUTHIYEDATH SCHOOL, KUTTIKKATTOOR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SUNIL V.MOHAMMED RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------- P.UMMAKULSU, D/O.P.KUNHALI HAJI, BADRIYA MANZIL, VALIYAPARAMBIL HOUSE, PERUMUGHAM, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. By PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZAR ADV. SRI.MANJERI SUNDERRAJ FOR R1 SRI.B.PREMNATH (E) FOR R1 THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No. 49 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 21st day of November, 2008 O R D E R The petitioner is aggrieved by an order directing payment of amounts under Section 3 of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act. The learned Magistrate had directed payment of a total amount of Rs.3,29,900/- The court of revision upheld the order in so far as it relates to an amount of Rs.3,05,900/- as shown below. Trial court Revisional court Fair and reasonable provision Rs.18,400 Rs. 18,400 Default Mahar Rs.24,000 Nil Mahar Rs.20,000 Rs. 20,000 Maintenance during iddat period Rs. 4,500 Rs. 4,500 Amounts appropriated Rs.75,000 Rs.75,000 Gold ornaments to be returned Rs. 2,08,000 Rs.2,08,000 ------------------------------------ Rs.3,29,900 Rs.3,05,900 ===================== 2. It is submitted at the Bar that the petitioner was not given reasonable opportunity to substantiate his contentions. An Crl.M.C.No. 49 of 2008 2 amount of Rs.2,00,000/- has been remitted before the court as per interim order on 6.11.2008. The learned counsel for the respondent also submits that proper amount has not been awarded under the head fair and reasonable provision, at any rate. 3. Be that as it may, in the course of discussions there is an agreement between the parties that the impugned orders can be set aside and the learned Magistrate can be directed to dispose of the matter afresh, subject to conditions. I am satisfied that such agreement between the parties can be accepted and this Crl.M.C. can be allowed. 4. In the result: a) This Crl.M.C. is allowed in part. b) The amount of Rs.2,00,000/- which is already deposited before the court below shall forthwith be released to the claimant/ respondent. c) The learned Magistrate shall dispose of M.C. 9 of 2001 afresh after giving the parties further opportunity to substantiate their respective contentions. Crl.M.C.No. 49 of 2008 3 d) The parties shall appear before the learned Magistrate on 9.12.2008. The learned Magistrate shall dispose of the matter afresh as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from that date. Whatever be the final decision in the case, the respondent shall not be liable to return the amount of Rs. 2 lakhs which is ordered to be released to her. e) The learned Magistrate shall decide the question afresh unfettered by any directions already issued or upheld by the revisional court. f) The attachment of property in furtherance of the execution proceedings shall continue till the entire amount payable after orders are passed afresh is paid and discharged. (R. BASANT) Judge tm