MAINTENANCE - PREL OBJ
In Maintenance u/s 23 DV Act or under 125 CrPC especially you need to prove that she herself is responsible for leaving you & that she left u without any just & reasonable cause. These PREL OBJ can also be used in other maintenance cases such as 24 HMA etc.
That the petitioner is guilty of destroying the sanctity of institution of marriage and has taken undue advantage of innocence of the respondent.
Prove without disclosing the law point u/s 125(4)
That the petitioner wife without any sufficient reason refuses to live with her respondent husband hence she is not entitled to receive an allowance under this section. Hence her application is not maintainable in the eyes of law & is liable to be rejected.
Civil prevails over Criminal
That it is well established that the judgment of the civil court shall prevail over the judgment of the criminal court. It is submitted that the maintenance proceedings between the petitioner/ wife & respondent/ husband are already under consideration in another (civil) court u/s 24 HMA vide Case no. 125/2014 with PJ Sh. Garud Kathpalia Ji (Rohini Courts) & the natural justice demands that parallel proceedings cannot be allowed to continue in different courts. hence this application is not maintainable in the eyes of law & is liable to be rejected.
One more para can be added to the above para (within MAINTENANCE PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS) as follows:-
That read with above para & for the purpose of sparing the victim the ordeal of multiple trials and judicial economy – prayer be made to consolidate both trials in order to minimize the prejudice with respect to potential antagonistic statements. For 2 trials would be cruel and relief sought under 2 trials would be inhuman and could turn into a logistical nightmare to comply with. Here is an opportunity for the system and the court administrators to make a human gesture and rule for one trial only.
RIGHT TO RESIDENCE - NO RTR
Relief under section 19 of this Act is not maintainable in the eyes of law due to vacillating stand of the petitioner. As per Delhi High Court if DIR (Domestic Incidence Report) is available then it must be taken into consideration before passing an order. It is respectfully submitted that as per the DIR the petitioner does not need Residence Order under section 19. Hence the relief sought under this section is not maintainable in the eyes of law & is liable to be rejected.
MONETARY RELIEF u/s 20 OF DV ACT
Monetary Relief u/s 20 of this Act is not maintainable in the eyes of law unless the domestic violence could be established.
RELIEF U/S 22 OF DV ACT NOT MAINTAINABLE
That it is stated that, u/s12 of PWDVA Act, if any domestic violence happened then report needs to be registered alongwith medical report (MLC) along with date, time & witnesses. Hence, Relief under section 22 of this Act is not maintainable in the eyes of law & is liable to be rejected.
NO DOMESTI RELATIONSHIP
That as per her own conduct of the petitioner there was no domestic relationship between the petitioner & any of the respondents as on the date of filing of this aforesaid plaint which is a pre-requisite under the act. The whole of the domestic violence act / PWDVA 2005 / 2006 / DV Rules OR by whatever name we call it depends upon the basic concept of domestic relationship & the petitioner by her own conduct has shun this domestic relationship before filing this plaint which can be proved by way of this annexure 455 being annexed with WS for the kind perusal of this Hon’ble Court.
NOTE:- This preliminary objection will work out best if the wife changes back to her maiden name (NAME FRAUD APPLICATION) and also gets any government identity card prepared in that new name with nw address (NO DOMESTIC RELATIONSHIP as per petitioner's own conduct r/w the name fraud application)
EARNING / ABLE BODIED WIFE
That the petitioner is well within the capabilities of earning means for her daily needs and expenses as the petitioner has been giving tuitions in the local vicinity before her marriage with the respondent and after marriage during her stay in the matrimonial home. This fact is within the knowledge of the petitioner & she has deliberately concealed this fact. It is further submitted that the petitioner has other sources of income as well. The relevant document(s) 26AS Statement of petitioner is annexed herewith for your kind perusal. Hence her application is not maintainable in the eyes of law & is liable to be dismissed.
IF DOCUMENTS NOT SUPPLIED BY HER
That the Respondent craves the leave of the Hon’ble Court to reserves the right to take any additional defense in the light of the facts that the copies of the documents filed along with the Application/ Plaint & other documents have not been supplied to the Respondent.
NOTE:- This is the way how we reserve our right legally. Now the court has to order her to supply the documents or onus is n her to provide you the documents else if she gets unfavorable orders without giving you copy of her documents then 3 doors open for you viz., complaint against judge to reg/vig, revision in next higher court, recall of order by the same judge due to technical issues, perjury on your opponent because opponent took favorable orders by misleading the hon'ble court by keeping you uninformed or keeping you in such a postion that you could not take your defense properly.
MAINTENANCE UNDER DV NOT MAINTAINABLE
A Civil suit is already pending between the parties vide case no. 656 / 2014 at Rohini Family Courts & maintenance has been claimed by the petitioner therein. As per Hon’ble Delhi High Court Domestic Violence Act 2005 does not give woman any additional right to claim maintenance from her husband. Under the act, the court of metropolitan magistrate (MM) has the power to grant maintenance and monetary relief on an interim basis in a fast track manner only in those cases where a woman has not exercised her right of claiming maintenance either under civil court or under section 125 of CrPC.
Here you are requesting MM & telling him lego-technical fallacy grounds because you are telling the MM that she does NOT have the power to grant maintenance because this very petitioner has already invoked her rights in CIVIL COURT and civil prevails over criminal.
PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS OF WS
That preliminary objections presented within respondent husband’s written statement to the above captioned petition shall also be included & read as part & parcel within these preliminary objections list as those are not being repeated herein for the sake of brevity.
NOTE:- If you have given 30 or more preliminary objections within DV u/s 12 reply then no need to attach all those preliminary objections here. Since you are filing reply to sec-12 & reply to sec-23 (maintenance) together hence for sake of brevity you can crave leave of the hon'ble court concerned to read all those preliminary objections herein so that all those PO's are written here in order sheet. DO NOT WORRY IF THE MM IS BIASED & DOES NOT TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION ANY / MOST OF YOUR PO's. YOUR JOB IS DONE. LET HIM PASS BIASED PRDERS. BE READY FOR REVISION/ RECALL/ OTHER OPTIONS LISTED AT:- https://documentsmisplacedbycourt.blogspot.in