Muhsina vs Nazarudeen — 130/2024

Case under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 Section 12. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED on 29th April 2026.

Case disposed

Crl.MP - CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETN.

CNR: KLAL240014182024

e-Filing Number

14-10-2024

Filing Number

101383/2024

Filing Date

15-Oct-2024

Registration No

130/2024

Registration Date

16-Oct-2024

Court

JFCM II, Haripad

Judge

1-Judicial First Class Magistrate - II, Haripad

Decision Date

29-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--ALLOWED

Last updated 12-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 Section 12
Crl.mp/1636/2025 Classification : Petition to Set Aside Order / Decree Section NazarudeenMuhsina
Crl.mp/1637/2025 Classification : Advance Application Section NazarudeenMuhsina
Crl.mp/1/2026 Classification : Petition Section MuhsinaNazarudeen

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Muhsina

    Adv. SIVAPRASAD B

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Nazarudeen

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 29-Apr-2026

    Judgement

  3. 29-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Judicial First Class Magistrate - II, Haripad

  4. 13-Apr-2026

    Adjourned

    Judicial First Class Magistrate - II, Haripad

  5. 07-Apr-2026

    Order/ Judgement

    Judicial First Class Magistrate - II, Haripad

  6. 01-Apr-2026

    For Hearing

    Judicial First Class Magistrate - II, Haripad

  7. 24-Mar-2026

    Appearance of Petitioner

    Judicial First Class Magistrate - II, Haripad

  8. 13-Mar-2026

    for evidence.

    Judicial First Class Magistrate - II, Haripad

  9. 11-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The Judicial Magistrate struck off the respondent's (father's) defence in a domestic violence maintenance case under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. The father was ordered to pay Rs. 3,000 monthly maintenance to his 16-year-old minor daughter but willfully failed to pay Rs. 39,000 in arrears despite earning Rs. 60,000 monthly, providing no legitimate excuse for non-compliance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  10. 11-Mar-2026

    for evidence.

    Judicial First Class Magistrate - II, Haripad

  11. 02-Mar-2026

    Oders in Cmp

    Judicial First Class Magistrate - II, Haripad

  12. 27-Feb-2026

    For hearing in Cmp

    Judicial First Class Magistrate - II, Haripad

  13. 16-Feb-2026

    Await report

    Judicial First Class Magistrate - II, Haripad

  14. 19-Jan-2026

    Referred to Mediator

    Judicial First Class Magistrate - II, Haripad

  15. 17-Jan-2026

    Appearance Of Parties

    Judicial First Class Magistrate - II, Haripad

  16. 08-Jan-2026

    Objection

    Judicial First Class Magistrate - II, Haripad

  17. 29-Nov-2025

    Call on

    Judicial First Class Magistrate - II, Haripad

  18. 11-Nov-2025

    Objection

    Judicial First Class Magistrate - II, Haripad

  19. 03-Nov-2025

    Call on

    Judicial First Class Magistrate - II, Haripad

  20. 01-Nov-2025

    Call on

    Judicial First Class Magistrate - II, Haripad

  21. 28-Oct-2025

    Order/ Judgement

    Judicial First Class Magistrate - II, Haripad

  22. 18-Oct-2025

    for evidence.

    Judicial First Class Magistrate - II, Haripad

  23. 05-Aug-2025

    exparte evidence

    Judicial First Class Magistrate - II, Haripad

  24. 19-Apr-2025

    exparte evidence

    Judicial First Class Magistrate - II, Haripad

  25. 11-Feb-2025

    For evidence

    Judicial First Class Magistrate - II, Haripad

  26. 28-Dec-2024

    For Objection and hearing

    Judicial First Class Magistrate - II, Haripad

  27. 20-Nov-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  28. 15-Oct-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 130/2024

casestatus.in Summary

The Judicial Magistrate struck off the respondent's (father's) defence in a domestic violence maintenance case under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. The father was ordered to pay Rs. 3,000 monthly maintenance to his 16-year-old minor daughter but willfully failed to pay Rs. 39,000 in arrears despite earning Rs. 60,000 monthly, providing no legitimate excuse for non-compliance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case