Kundile Veettil Muhaseenath Salma vs Afnad Advocate - K SATHYAN — 24/2022

Case under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 Section 12. Disposed: Contested--PARTLY ALLOWED on 20th April 2026.

MC - MISCELLANEOUS CASE

CNR: KLKN250001432022

Case disposed

Filing Number

142/2022

Filing Date

03-08-2022

Registration No

24/2022

Registration Date

03-08-2022

Court

Gramnyayalaya, Iritty at Payam

Judge

1-Nyayadhikari

Decision Date

20th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--PARTLY ALLOWED

Acts & Sections

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 Section 12
Crl.MP/452/2025 Classification : Petition To Set Aside Order / Decree Section Kundile Veettil Muhaseenath SalmaAfnad

Petitioner(s)

Kundile Veettil Muhaseenath Salma

Adv. T A Justine

Respondent(s)

Afnad Advocate - K SATHYAN

Seenath

Adv. K SATHYAN

Swaliha

Adv. K SATHYAN

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Nyayadhikari

20-04-2026

Disposed

16-04-2026

Order/ Judgement

13-04-2026

For further hearing

04-04-2026

For further hearing

30-03-2026

For further hearing

Final Orders / Judgements

20-04-2026
Final Order

Case Summary: MC 24/2022 Court: Village Court (Gram Nyayalaya), Iritti, Payyanur Judge: Sri. Mohamed Mausoom. P. T. Date: April 20, 2026 Petitioner: Kundile Veettil Muhaseenath Salma (21-year-old woman) Respondents: 1. Afnad (husband) 2. Seenath (mother-in-law) 3. Swaliha (sister-in-law) Decision The court partially granted the petitioner's application under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The court found that the petitioner suffered domestic violence including physical abuse, financial exploitation, and emotional cruelty from her in-laws. The court issued a protection order under Section 18 of the 2005 Act and ordered monthly maintenance of Rs. 10,000 from the first respondent. Additionally, the court awarded compensation of Rs. 6,00,000 to be paid jointly by all three respondents under Section 22 of the 2005 Act. However, the court rejected the petitioner's claim for return of specific gold ornaments (20¾ sovereigns) due to insufficient evidence of their alleged misappropriation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: MC 24/2022 Court: Village Court (Gram Nyayalaya), Iritti, Payyanur Judge: Sri. Mohamed Mausoom. P. T. Date: April 20, 2026 Petitioner: Kundile Veettil Muhaseenath Salma (21-year-old woman) Respondents: 1. Afnad (husband) 2. Seenath (mother-in-law) 3. Swaliha (sister-in-law) Decision The court partially granted the petitioner's application under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The court found that the petitioner suffered domestic violence including physical abuse, financial exploitation, and emotional cruelty from her in-laws. The court issued a protection order under Section 18 of the 2005 Act and ordered monthly maintenance of Rs. 10,000 from the first respondent. Additionally, the court awarded compensation of Rs. 6,00,000 to be paid jointly by all three respondents under Section 22 of the 2005 Act. However, the court rejected the petitioner's claim for return of specific gold ornaments (20¾ sovereigns) due to insufficient evidence of their alleged misappropriation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Gramnyayalaya, Iritty at Payam All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case