Home INDIA High Court Upholds Rs 3-Crore Compensation To Woman In Domestic Violence Case

High Court Upholds Rs 3-Crore Compensation To Woman In Domestic Violence Case

by Alexander
0 comment
Supreme Court upholds compensation of Rs 3 Crore to woman in case of domestic violence


The couple was married in 1994.


The Bombay High Court has upheld a trial court order directing a husband to pay compensation of Rs 3 crore and monthly maintenance of Rs 1.5 lakh to his estranged wife, taking into account a factor that can are taken when determining the payment amount: the impact of acts of domestic violence against the injured person.

The amount is awarded to the woman as compensation not only for physical injuries but also for mental torture and emotional distress, Justice Sharmila Deshmukh noted in her March 22 order in the domestic violence case.

“For obvious reasons, there cannot be a straitjacket formula that applies to everyone and the amount will differ depending on the facts of each case. In my opinion, one of the factors that can be taken into account in determining the amount is of compensation the impact of the acts of domestic violence against the injured person,” the Supreme Court noted.

Judge Sharmila ruled that the court’s finding was based on a discussion that there was continuous domestic violence between 1994 and 2017, which cannot be blamed.

The couple got married in January 1994 in Mumbai and later moved to the US where another wedding ceremony was held.

In 2005, the duo returned to Mumbai and started living in a house jointly owned by them. However, in 2008, the woman moved to her mother’s house, while the man returned to the US in 2014.

In July 2017, the woman filed a case against her husband under the Domestic Violence Act (DVA) in the court of a metropolitan magistrate. The woman alleged that the man called her “secondhand” during their honeymoon because of her previous broken engagement.

In the US, she was constantly subjected to domestic abuse, including suspicion about her character, making false accusations of illicit relations with other men and beating her until she confessed to the same, the woman alleged.

The court noted the woman’s evidence regarding incidents of domestic violence corroborated by her mother, brother and uncle.

In its January 2023 judgment, the court held that the woman was a victim of domestic violence by her husband and directed him to pay Rs 3 crore as compensation to her.

It ordered the man to find suitable accommodation – a residential flat of at least 1,000 sq ft of carpet – for his wife in Mumbai’s Dadar area, or alternatively pay Rs 75,000 towards the rent of the house.

He was also ordered to return all jewelery (‘streedhan’) and other belongings to the woman and pay her Rs 1,50,000 per month as maintenance.

Aggrieved by the court’s order, the man filed a review petition in the Supreme Court.

The single judge upheld the court’s order, but said compensation should be awarded for the injuries, including mental torture and emotional distress, caused by the suspect’s actions.

She opined that while the abuse will necessarily result in mental torture and emotional distress for the injured person, the severity will vary from person to person.

“In the present case, both parties are admittedly well educated and highly placed in their workplace and social life. Given the social status, the acts of domestic violence would be strongly felt by the woman as it would affect her self-esteem. the court noted.

The Supreme Court said the woman was subjected to physical, economic, mental and emotional abuse and had to live with her mother for nine years. The man left the woman and went to the US without making any provision for her.

The court noted that the magistrate awarded damages taking into account all the facts and circumstances and determined the amount by taking into account the status of the parties and income.

The court reached its decision based on the discussion that there was continuous domestic violence between 1994 and 2017, for which nothing can be blamed, according to the Supreme Court.

“I do not see any reason to interfere with the impugned judgment and order in the exercise of the review jurisdiction of this court. The petition for review is dismissed,” the judge added.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by WhatsNew2Day staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

You may also like