Shabitha vs Sanish Mon — 3600008/2023
Case under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 Section 12 DV act. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED on 16th March 2026.
MC - MISCELLANEOUS CASE
CNR: KLTR360002852023
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
3600214/2023
Filing Date
26-04-2023
Registration No
3600008/2023
Registration Date
26-04-2023
Court
Gramanyayalaya, Mathilakam
Judge
1-Nyayadhikari ,Gram Nyayalaya Mathilakam
Decision Date
16th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--ALLOWED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Shabitha
Adv. Sheeja K.R
Respondent(s)
Sanish Mon
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Nyayadhikari ,Gram Nyayalaya Mathilakam
Disposed
Order/Judgement
FOR HEARING
FOR HEARING
Verify and report
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 16-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 11-03-2026 | Order/Judgement | |
| 10-03-2026 | FOR HEARING | |
| 09-03-2026 | FOR HEARING | |
| 07-03-2026 | Verify and report |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The Gram Nyayalaya (village court) in Mathilakam, Kerala granted a protection order under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, finding that the husband subjected his wife to sustained physical and mental abuse including beatings, insults, infidelity allegations, and public humiliation. The court ordered the husband to pay ₹2 lakhs in compensation, provide ₹6,000 monthly maintenance, return 25 sovereigns of gold jewelry (or its market value), and prohibited him from harassing the wife or accessing her workplace. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The Gram Nyayalaya (village court) in Mathilakam, Kerala granted a protection order under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, finding that the husband subjected his wife to sustained physical and mental abuse including beatings, insults, infidelity allegations, and public humiliation. The court ordered the husband to pay ₹2 lakhs in compensation, provide ₹6,000 monthly maintenance, return 25 sovereigns of gold jewelry (or its market value), and prohibited him from harassing the wife or accessing her workplace. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts