Jasna vs Dineesh — 37/2020
Case under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 Section 12. Disposed: Contested--PARTLY ALLOWED. on 31st March 2026.
MC - MISCELLANEOUS & MAINTENANCE CASE
CNR: KLKK220019272020
Filing Number
37/2020
Filing Date
28-Sep-2020
Registration No
37/2020
Registration Date
28-Sep-2020
Court
Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Koyilandy
Judge
1-Judicial First class Magistrate
Decision Date
31-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--PARTLY ALLOWED.
Last updated 10-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Jasna
Adv. Lal Kishore C
Respondent(s)
-
1.Dineesh
-
2.Babu
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
31-Mar-2026
Final OrderView PDF
Case Summary: MC 37/2020 Court Decision: The petition is allowed in part. The court found that Jasna (petitioner) suffered domestic violence from her husband Dineesh P (first respondent) and awarded her ₹1,00,000 as compensation, ₹20,000 monthly maintenance, and a protection order, while dismissing claims against the second respondent (Dineesh's father). Key Facts: Jasna married Dineesh on 15 December 2019, but within days he spent most time with his friend Shamil, forcing her to work as a domestic servant, pledge her gold ornaments, and endure physical and mental harassment. She filed for domestic violence protection under the 2005 Act, claiming ₹15 lakhs compensation and ₹25,000 monthly maintenance. Court Reasoning: Though Jasna produced no independent witnesses or medical evidence, the court accepted her sole testimony as credible and convincing, relying on precedent that victim testimony suffices under the Act. The court reduced compensation to ₹1,00,000 due to lack of quantifiable damages and fixed maintenance at ₹20,000 monthly (below her ₹25,000 claim) based on the husband's salary and her lack of income. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
31-Mar-2026
Disposed
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
24-Mar-2026
Order/ Judgement
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
19-Mar-2026
For affidavit.
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
16-Mar-2026
For affidavit.
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
25-Feb-2026
For Hearing
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
07-Feb-2026
For Hearing
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
31-Jan-2026
For Further Defence Evidence
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
24-Jan-2026
For Further Defence Evidence
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
17-Jan-2026
for evidence
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
03-Jan-2026
Defendant/Respondent Evidence
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
17-Dec-2025
Defendant/Respondent Evidence
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
22-Nov-2025
Further evidence
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
01-Nov-2025
For cross examination.
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
25-Oct-2025
For cross examination.
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
27-Sep-2025
for evidence
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
16-Aug-2025
for evidence
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
01-Aug-2025
for evidence
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
11-Jul-2025
for evidence
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
17-Jun-2025
Order/ Judgement
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
03-Jun-2025
For Objection and hearing
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
13-May-2025
for evidence
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
21-Apr-2025
for evidence
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
12-Mar-2025
for evidence
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
03-Feb-2025
for evidence
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
04-Jan-2025
for evidence
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
30-Nov-2024
for evidence
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
11-Nov-2024
for evidence
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
15-Oct-2024
for evidence
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
23-Sep-2024
for evidence
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
31-Aug-2024
for evidence
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
02-Aug-2024
Issue notice
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
12-Jul-2024
Issue notice
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
01-Jun-2024
Issue notice
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
27-Apr-2024
Issue notice
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
14-Mar-2024
Restored
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
14-Mar-2024
Appearance of Accused
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
14-Mar-2024
Issue notice
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
06-Nov-2021
Disposed
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
28-Oct-2021
for evidence
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
01-Oct-2021
For Counter
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
12-Aug-2021
For Counter
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
18-Jun-2021
For Counter
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
22-May-2021
For Counter
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
29-Apr-2021
For Counter
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
15-Apr-2021
Call on
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
12-Mar-2021
Call on
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
24-Feb-2021
Call on
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
21-Jan-2021
Call on
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
07-Jan-2021
Call on
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
30-Dec-2020
Call on
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
20-Nov-2020
Appearance of Accused
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
12-Nov-2020
Appearance of Accused
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
05-Nov-2020
Appearance of Accused
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
23-Oct-2020
Appearance of Accused
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
05-Oct-2020
Appearance of Accused
Judicial First class Magistrate
-
29-Sep-2020
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
28-Sep-2020
Case filed
Registration No. 37/2020
Case Summary: MC 37/2020 Court Decision: The petition is allowed in part. The court found that Jasna (petitioner) suffered domestic violence from her husband Dineesh P (first respondent) and awarded her ₹1,00,000 as compensation, ₹20,000 monthly maintenance, and a protection order, while dismissing claims against the second respondent (Dineesh's father). Key Facts: Jasna married Dineesh on 15 December 2019, but within days he spent most time with his friend Shamil, forcing her to work as a domestic servant, pledge her gold ornaments, and endure physical and mental harassment. She filed for domestic violence protection under the 2005 Act, claiming ₹15 lakhs compensation and ₹25,000 monthly maintenance. Court Reasoning: Though Jasna produced no independent witnesses or medical evidence, the court accepted her sole testimony as credible and convincing, relying on precedent that victim testimony suffices under the Act. The court reduced compensation to ₹1,00,000 due to lack of quantifiable damages and fixed maintenance at ₹20,000 monthly (below her ₹25,000 claim) based on the husband's salary and her lack of income. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts