3rd RGNUL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

28th March 30th March 2014

MOOT PREPOSITION

Hari Lal married Vimla Devi in 1983. After marriage Vimla Devi went to her matrimonial
house in Bhimpur village of district Sindusthan, which was Hari Lals fathers house. After
few months of marriage, Hari Lal began to neglect Vimla Devi. Gradually, Hari Lal and his
family members began to demand dowry from Vimla Devi and her parents. There was no
warmth in the marriage and physical violence against Vimla Devi at hands of Hari Lal
becamearoutine.VimlaDevicontinuedtoresidewithherhusbandforanyearandahalf,
whereafter,shegotpregnant.Duringherpregnancy,shewassenttoherparentshouseby
herhusbandandthelargerpartoftheperiodofpregnancywasspentbyheratherparents
houseinBhimpur.ShegavebirthtoagirlchildDollyon22ndMarch1986.NeitherHariLal,
noranyofhisfamilymembers,cametotakeheraway.Whenthechildwastwomonthsold,
fatherandbrotherofVimla,broughthertothehouseofHariLal.ThefatherinlawofVimla,
Ramesh Chand allowed her to stay in his house, however, the incidents of illtreatment,
verbal,physicalandemotionalabuseatthehandsofHariLalaggravated.Afterafewdaysof
stayathermatrimonialhouse,shewasdrivenoutbyHariLalallegingthatDollywasnothis
child.
Vimla never returned except for attending a marriage in Haris family in 1990. She got
employed as an Anganwari worker, in 1991. In 1994 Hari moved the Court under the
GuardianshipandWardsAct,seekingthatthecustodyofDollybehandedovertohim.The
action was contested by Vimla, who was able to substantiate that she was in a better
positiontotakecareofDollyandfulfillingherbasicrequirements.Sheadmittedinthecourt
thatshedidnothaveenoughsourceofincometosupporttheeducationofherdaughteron
herown.TheactioninitiatedbyHariLalfailed.
In the year 1997 Vimla moved an application before the concerned Gram Panchayat of
Bhimpur for provision of maintenance for herself and her daughter. Due notice of the
applicationwasgiventoHariwhocontestedthesame.Afterhearingboththepartiesand
considering the facts and circumstances the concerned Gram Panchayat, ordered Hari to

pay a maintenance of Rs. 500/ per month to the applicant/Vimla for herself and her
daughterspurposes.Notevenasinglepaymentwasmadebyhimasperthisorder.
Itmaybepointedoutherethatduringthisentiretime,thenameofVimlaandherdaughter
hadbeenstruckofffromthelocalregisters(familyregisters,rationcards,etc),pertainingto
thefamilyofHariLalastheywerelivingseparatelyandtheirrecordwasbeingmaintained
asaseparateunitintheplaceoftheirresidence.AfterseparationfromHariandduringthis
entireperiodthisfamilyunitconsistingofVimlaandherdaughterDolly,wasinthelistof
peopleBelowPovertyLinemaintainedwiththelocalauthorities.
OntheotherhandHari,whowasworkingasagovernmentservantandearningamonthly
salaryofaboutRs.30,000,hadmovedoutofthejointfamilyhouseandconstructedanew
houseinBhimpurandshiftedinthishousealongwithhisbrother.
Intheyear2010whenDollyhadalreadycompletedhereducationatthecollegelevel,Vimla
initiated an action against Hari under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence
Act,2005,prayingthatshewasaggrievedpersonwithinthedefinitionofthisexpression
under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and since, she had suffered verbal, physical and
emotionalabuseatthehandsofHari,whereaftersheremainedeconomicallydeprivedfor
wantofanymaintenanceoreconomicsupportbyHariforaperiodofmorethan2decades
andnowwhenherdaughterwasgrownupintotheageofmarriage,sheandherdaughter
areentitledtodifferentreliefsprovidedforundertheProtectionofWomenfromDomestic
ViolenceAct,2005.ShehasalsoprayedthattherespondentbedirectedtoallowVimlaand
herdaughtertolivewithhiminhispresentresidence,whileorderinghimnottocommitany
further acts of domestic violence against either of them. She has also prayed that the
stridhana, that she had left in her matrimonial home in 1985, be restored to her and her
daughtershouldbeprovidedshareinproperty.Monetaryreliefandcompensationhasalso
beenprayedfor.ThepetitionhasbeenfiledbeforetheJudicialMagistrateofSindusthan.
Other than the above discussed, in the course of evidence, the respondent was able to
prove that the local authorities, after due consideration and by way of a resolution, had
ordered deletion of the name of Vimla from the list of people Below Poverty Line, of the
concernedarea,theresolutionwaspassedinJanuary2011.
Argue for both the sides, specifically, covering the issues as Limitation, Maintainability,
Estoppeletc.