IN THE 49TH COURT OF METROPOLITIAN MAGISTRATE,

AT VIKROLI, MUMBAI

D.V. CASE NO. 79 OF 2019

DIPIKA VIKAS LOKHANDE …APPLICANT

V/s

VIKAS NARAYAN LOKHANDE

& ORS …RESPONDENTS

I, Mr. Narayan Lokhande of Kharghar, Navi Mumbai, Indian

inhabitant, residing at C/8, Room No. 3, Gharkul Society, Sector 15,

Kharghar, Navi Mumbai 410210, Respondent No. 3 above named, do

hereby swear and say as under:

1. I have read a copy of the application and in reply thereto I say

as under:

2. I am making and filing the present Written statement for the

limited purpose of opposing the above application and/or for

grant of any interim relief and I crave leave of this Hon’ble

Court to file further and/or additional affidavit in reply to the

above application, if required on behalf of all the repondent’s.

3. At the outset I deny each and every allegation, contention,

statement and insinuation contained in the above application

which is contrary to and/or inconsistent with whatever stated

herein after. Nothing contained in the above application shall

1
 be deemed to have been admitted for want of denials or

otherwise.

4. At the further outset, the above application is liable to be

dismissed on the following amongst other preliminary grounds

which are without prejudice and in the alternative to one

another: -

(a) that the above application as framed and filed is mis-

conceived and not maintainable;

(b) That the applicant has suppressed material facts and

documents and more particularly the applicant’s own

conduct. The Applicant has made false and misleading

statements. The Applicant is, therefore, guilty of

suppressio vari and suggesio falsi;

(c) That the above Application is filed with a view to

overcome with the illegality and offence committed by

the applicant;

(d) That the Applicant is liable to be committed contempt of

this Hon’ble Court for misdirecting this Hon’ble Court

by making false statement and suppressing the material

facts and records therefore the applicant to be prosecuted

for committing perjury;

(e) That the above application is the gross abuse and misuse

of the process of this Hon’ble Court;

2
 (f) That the above application is only with a view to

pressurize and/or blackmail the Respondent’s in order to

succumb to the illegal demands of the applicant;

5. Without prejudice to the aforesaid, the material and relevant

facts, which are required to be examined to decide the above

application are as under:-

The Respondent No. 1 got married to Ms. Dipika

Raju Pawar now known as Mrs. Dipika Vikas

Lokhande (After Marriage) on 1st December 2013.

The marriage was an arrange marriage through a

common mediator and after consensus of all the

marriage came to be effected. The marriage

expenses as decided where borne by both sides on

50%-50% basis. Initially the applicant and her

parents did not inform the respondent no. 1 or his

parents i.e. respondent no. 2 & 3, that the applicant

has a problem with her eye sight and she has a

difficulty in seeing things. But still the

respondent’s accepted the applicant without any

if’s and but’s or complain. Infact, they started her

medication by taking her to the doctor and started

taking good care of her. Infact, the Respondent no.

2 (Mother-in-law) of the applicant was kind

enough to help the applicant with her day to day

chores and also with the kitchen work, such as

3
cooking food, washing utensils, cutting vegetables,

etc.

The applicant was also not ready to conceive and

was eating contraceptive pills without the

knowledge of his husband i.e. Respondent no. 1.

After 2 years of marriage, when she was unable to

conceive and was asked for getting a medical

check up done, she refused and informed that

respondent no. 1 (husband) that she does not want

to get pregnant now. When asked for the reason,

she informed that her figure would be ruined and

that she is too young to handle a kid, everyone in

the family tried to convince her. But to no avail.

The Respondent’s also informed that same to the

applicant’s parents, so that they could intervene

and make their daughter understand. But they

supported their daughter’s decision. So, the

Respondent’s also did not force the applicant and

left the decision on her. The applicant was happy

with that. Then in the year 2017 i.e. 3 years after

marriage, when the applicant was pregnant she was

very upset. But, since everyone was happy around,

she agreed to keep the child. All was good until 5 th

September 2017, till the daughter was born. Th

Applicant was unhappy as she wanted a baby boy.

But the Respondent No. 1 was very happy as he

4
always wanted a girl child. The Respondent’s

convinced the applicant and pacified her. The

applicant always created a hussle in feeding the

small one and got irritated frequently on handling

of the daughter. But still the Respondent No.

2(Mother-in-law) always came for her rescue and

that would take care of the daughter and also did

the house hold work, so as to avoid mood swings

of the applicant. The entire family of the

respondent’s managed and adjusted to the tunes

and tantrums of the applicant from he very start i.e.

from marriage. The Applicant also did not like the

building culture as she was from the

slums(chopadpatti) and she did not like the culture

people around, as she had mentioned many a times

to the respondents that there are no fights and that

the place is to silent for her to live, as she always

lived and grew with the dirty and foul fights

happening in and around her neighbourhood and

she liked that. The applicant was all fed-up with

the the handling of the new born baby and the

silent neighbourhood, the joint family culture of

the family. She wanted to live separately as the

new born girl child was too closed to the

respondent no. 2 & 3, as they took great care of the

sibling (new born girl child). So, she wanted to

5
stay at her parent’s home at Ghatkopar, Mumbai.

The applicant wanted to take the girl child so that

the girl child gets detached from the love and

affection of the respondent no. 2 & 3. The

applicant also made a hue and cry that she should

be accompanied with her husband i.e. respondent

no. 1 to her parent’s place at Ghatkopar, Mumbai.

The Respondent no. 2 & 3, did not have an option

but to succumb to the applicant’s demands and

they let go their son i.e. respondent no. 1 and their

grand daughter Ms. Somya, so as to avoid any

quarrels or disputes amongst the family. That the

Applicant, Respondent No. 1 & the grand daughter

Ms. Somya moved to the applicant’s parents house

and that they lived there for around a year. But,

since it was a slum area, everyday the respondent

had to hear filthy and foul language at home as

well as their neighbourhood and that he felt that

this will not the right place for her daughter to

grow and that upon continuous requests to move

back to Navi Mumbai, the applicant agreed to

move back provided, that they lived separately

from the respondent no. 2 & 3. The Respondent

no. 1 agreed to the same and said that once his

financial condition is sound they should move out

and live separately, so as to avoid any

6
confrontation or tussle and got the applicant back

to the matrimonial home at Kharghar, Navi

Mumbai. But, the Applicant was persistent that she

did not wanted to live in a joint family and that she

wanted to live separately from her in-laws i.e.

Respondent no. 2 & 3. The Respondent No. 1 tried

to explain that both the respondent no. 2 & 3 are

senior citizens with old age ailments and that if

any untoward incident occurs, he shall be held

responsible and that his financial condition does

not allow him to purchase or rent another

accommodation for separate living. Due to the

aforesaid reasons and keeping the same in mind,

the applicant called her father and brother to the

matrimonial house and packed all her belongings

and took everything with her along with the grand

daughter Ms. Somya and informed that she willm

only return provided that there is separate

accommodation for them to live as she does not

wish to live in a joint family with the Respondent

No. 2 & 3 and that she wants to live near her

parents that is in Ghatkopar, Mumbai and the

applicant left the house with her own free will on

07/02/2018 and since then she has neither returned

nor come back inspite of repeated requests by

family and near relatives. After the said incident

7
 the respondent no. 1 is heart broken and in

depression and also met with an accident due to

which is out of work and is unemployed right now

and that the Respondent no. 2(father in law) aged

above 60 years is still working odd jobs to support

his family and that is the only present source of

income for the family as Respondent no. 2 is a

house wife and that Respondent no. 4 & 5 stay

separately as they are the Sister-in-law and

Brother-in-law of the applicants and have they

separate family and their independent source of

income to support their families. The Applicant as

everywhere tarnished the name and reputation of

the respondent no. 1, that he is unable to show his

face in his relatives, family and friends, left with

no job, his bank balance is completely depleted

and he is been living at the mercy of his father,

suffering from mental stress and trauma each and

every day, his life is completely shattered as the

applicant has deserted him and left his matrimonial

house.

6. The Respondent now deals with the Petition Paragraph wise

which are follows hereunder:-

a. With reference to para No.1 & 2 of the said application the

Respondent say that what is stated therein are true hence

require no comment.

8
b. With reference to para No.3 of the said application the

Respondent says that what is stated therein are partly true.

The Respondent say that Petitioner’s parents spent as per

their wish at the marriage and it was never asked by the

respondent and he never took a penny from his in laws and

all the expenses mentioned are exaggerated and the

applicant should put strict proof thereof, as no bills or

receipts of expenses are produced by the applicant with the

application.

c. With reference to Para. No. 4 of the said application is false

and the same is denied by the Respondent and she is put to

strict proof thereof. And not a single complaint was

given/made anywhere by the applicant and that the applicant

lived happily and peacefully till she left the matrimonial

house with her own free with her father and brother that too

threatening the respondents of dire consequences and with

the condition to return only if the respondent no. 1 lives with

the applicant leaving her old aged parents i.e. respondent no.

2 & 3. The applicant has made vague allegations of mental

and physical harassment made to her in the application

without citing the date, place, time and the people who has

harassed her and by doing what act.

d. With reference to Para. No. 5 of the said application is false

and the same is denied by the Respondent and she is put to

strict proof thereof. the Respondent states that he does not

consume any alcohol and that the allegation is absolutely

9
 false and unwarranted and that there was never ever any

demand of dowry from the respondents ever and there was

no physical assault on the applicant as stated by her and is

an after though, which can be clearly made out by the 1 st

application of the applicant given at the Police Station dated

19/12/2018. That is after 10 months of leaving the house.

The complaint given was also given in a fit of rage which

cane be clearly seen as there is a N.C. done right after giving

that against Trupti Ugade.

e. With reference to Para. No. 6 of the said application is false

and the same is denied by the Respondent and she is put to

strict proof thereof. the Respondent no. 2 infact helped the

applicant with all the household chores, as she was unable to

see properly and even before and after pregnancy, the

respondent no. 2 helped the applicant with the new born

baby and also took care of the applicant with her needs. But,

the applicant herself wanted to go back to the maternal

house and wanted to live with her family and that she

wanted the new born baby to be detached with her in-laws

and hence wanted a separate house and wanted to stay

separately from respondent no. 2 & 3. That the applicant

was never abused or assaulted at the hands of any of the

respondent and was always respected and is still respected.

f. With reference to Para. No. 7 of the said application the

Respondent state that it is absolutely false and a vague

allegation made against all the respondents no. 2, 3, 4, 5.

10
 They have never taunted or insulted the applicant. Infact,

have taken her to the doctor for check-up and also started

with the medication for her. The allegation against the

Brother-in-law (Mr. Ravindra Rokade) wrongly mentioned

as Tejas Rokade is an attempt to falsely implicate him in a

false case so as to spoil the house of the Respondent’s Sister

Pallavi Ravindra Rokade. As he has always respected the

applicant as a sister-in-law and always given her respect and

that there was no good reason of him abusing or taunting the

applicant.

g. With reference to Para. No. 8, 9, 10 & 11 of the said

application the Respondent denies the allegations made

therein in Toto. As no parents would see her their daughter

getting abused and/or beaten in front of them and secondly

the delivery expenses was paid by the respondent and not by

the parents of the applicant and infact the applicant wanted a

boy child. Whereas the respondent no. 1 wanted a girl child.

The applicant was unhappy after the delivery of a female

child. And that she happily stayed at the matrimonial house

after delivery and through care was taken by the mother-in-

law of the baby and the applicant.

h. With reference to Para. No. 12 of the said application the

Respondent denies therein in Toto. The Respondent does not

know any person by the name of Trupthi Ughade as

mentioned by the applicant abovenamed nor is aware about

the N.C. filed by the applicant against the said lady.

11
i. With reference to Para. No. 13 of the said Petition the

Respondent denies therein in Toto, as they are aware that

when a marriage is in subsistence, he will not and cannot

marry another lady. Infact, the Respondents where called to

the Women Cell, Belapur. But, the applicant came to be

absent and never came before the Women cell after making

the complaint, inspite of repeated calls and reminders from

the women cell. Hence, the application of the applicant was

kept in abeyance and the respondents after recording their

statements where left.

j. With reference to Para. No. 14 of the said application the

Respondent denies therein in Toto and ask the applicant to

put strict proof hereof. As the respondents has never

received any such notice or complaint as presented with the

list of documents. If they have actually sent the notice, it

should have been accompanied by the postal receipt as well

as the acknowledgement card, which is not there on record,

which clearly shows that the Complaint/Notice was never

sent to the respondents. But has been placed on record to

show the bonafide of the applicant, which clearly shows that

the applicant has not approached the Hon’ble court with

clean hands and hence she is not eligible for any relief from

the Hon’ble Court.

k. With reference to Para. No. 15 of the said Petition the

Respondent states that she has already left the matrimonial

house in presence of her own father and brother along with

12
 all her belongings as well as their daughter and threatened

the respondents of dire consequences if followed.

l. With reference to Para. No. 16 of the said application the

Respondent states that they have never committed any type

of domestic violence on the applicant on her parents and all

the allegations are false and vague.

m. With reference to Para. No. 17 of the said application the

Respondent states that the respondent no. 1 is unemployed

at this present time and it can be clearly seen initially in the

Advocate letter so presented by the applicant herself, she has

stated that he is working at a salary of Rs.20,000/- and then

in her complaint after a few months, she increased her salary

to the tune of Rs.10,000/- and in her application she has

falsely stated that the respondent no. 1 earns Rs.30,000/-.

This clearly shows the applicants ill intent to grab money

from the respondent and not to go back for restitution of

conjugal rights. The respondent does not even have the

money to hire an Advocate and has requested a friend to

appear on his behalf before the Hon’ble Court and he is

totally aware and conscience of applicant’s feelings.

n. With reference to Para No. 18 of the said application the

Respondent says that he has neither desserted the applicant

his wife nor her daughter and he shall do his best to provide

whatever he can once they return to their matrimonial house.

o. With reference to Prayers of the said application the

Respondent says that the applicant is not entitled to any

13
 reliefs as prayed therein as the story produced by the

applicant is prima facie wrong, false and vague without any

proof’s and/or evidence.

7. The Respondent did not wanted to bring all these facts as the

Respondent still wanted to live with applicant, but since in

order to answer the allegation leveled by the applicant the

Respondent was forced to bring the truth before this Hon’ble

Court. The Respondents are still ready and willing to accept

applicant if the Petitioner undertakes to be true with the

Respondents and his parents.

8. Thus in the circumstances no case is made out for any reliefs in

the above application under jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court

and the above application is required to be dismissed in limini.

I, therefore, submit that the above application be dismissed with

compensatory costs.

Solemnly affirmed at Mumbai )

On this 3rd day of January 2020 )

Respondent

Advocates for Respondent

14
 VERIFICATION

I, Mr. Narayan Lokhande of Kharghar, Navi Mumbai, Indian

inhabitant, residing at C/8, Room No. 3, Gharkul Society, Sector 15,

Kharghar, Navi Mumbai 410210, Respondent No. 3 above named, do

hereby on solemn affirmation states that whatever stated in the above

paras are true and correct and believe the same to be true.

Solemnly affirmed at Mumbai )

On this 3rd day of January 2020 )

Respondent

Advocates for Respondent

15
 IN THE 49TH COURT OF METROPOLITIAN MAGISTRATE,

AT VIKROLI, MUMBAI

D.V. CASE NO. 79 OF 2019

DIPIKA VIKAS LOKHANDE …APPLICANT

V/s

VIKAS NARAYAN LOKHANDE

& ORS …RESPONDENTS

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF

WRITTEN STATEMENT

I, Mr. Narayan Lokhande of Kharghar, Navi Mumbai, Indian

inhabitant, residing at C/8, Room No. 3, Gharkul Society, Sector 15,

Kharghar, Navi Mumbai 410210, Respondent No. 3 above named, do

hereby on solemn affirmation states as under:

1. I state that I am filing my written statement today before this

Hon’ble Court, against the main as well as interim application

filed by the applicant u/s 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22 of Domestic

Violence Act, 2005 against me and my family.

2. I state that I do not want to reproduce the same contents again

here at the cost of repetition and therefore I state that this

Hon’ble Court be pleased to treat the contents of my written

statement as a part and parcel of this affidavit.

3. I state that the contents of this affidavit are true and correct to

the best of my knowledge, belief and I have signed this on 3rd

Day of January, 2020 at Mumbai.

Deponent

16
 VERIFICATION

I, Mr. Narayan Lokhande of Kharghar, Navi Mumbai, Indian

inhabitant, residing at C/8, Room No. 3, Gharkul Society, Sector 15,

Kharghar, Navi Mumbai 410210, Respondent No. 3 above named, do

hereby on solemn affirmation states that whatever stated in the above

paras are true and correct and believe the same to be true.

Solemnly affirmed at Mumbai )

On this 3rd day of January 2020 )

Respondent

Advocates for Respondent

17
 IN THE 49TH COURT OF

METROPOLITIAN

MAGISTRATE, AT VIKROLI,

MUMBAI

D.V. CASE NO. 79 OF 2019

DIPIKA VIKAS LOKHANDE

…APPLICANT

V/s

VIKAS NARAYAN LOKHANDE

& ORS
…RESPONDENTS

WRITTEN STATEMENT OF
RESPONDENTS ABOVENAMED IN
REPLY TO THE MAIN AND INTERIM
APPLICATION OF THE APPLICANT.
Dated this 3RD day of January, 2020.

Arvind Gautam Sirsat

Advocate for Respondent
SAHNI LEGAL AID HOUSE
36A, Prabhat Center, Sector 1A,
CBD Belapur, Navi Mumbai 400614
Mob: +91 9545922149
e-mail: 2012slah@gmail.com

18