Back
SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
Pankaj Kaushik, S/o. Raghunath Kaushik – Appellant
Versus
Pushpa Pankaj Kaushik, W/o. Pankaj Kaushik – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The petitioner-husband is before this court seeking for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 09.04.2018 passed by the Additional Civil Judge and JMFC-II, Karwar, Uttar Kannada in D.V. No.11/2014.
2. Though the Petitioner and Respondent No.1 were represented by their respective advocates before the trial court, they have chosen to represent themselves as parties in person in these proceedings.
3. The prayers sought for by the petitioner-husband in the present writ petition are as under:
3.1. Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned interim order, dated 09.04.2018, vide Annexure-A, passed by the Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC (II Court), Karwar, Uttar Kannada, in D.V. No.11/2014 and inter alia pass any appropriate orders in the facts and circumstances of the case.
3.2. The respondent No.1 - wife of petitioner and respondent No.2, Protection Officer, Shri. P.H. Naik, (CDPO), acting on her behalf be issued a notice at the earliest, for further hearing and final disposal of this writ petition before this Hon’ble Court.
3.3. The petitioner on the grounds of legal expenses borne by him for a period of four years and i
The duty of the Protection Officer to produce original documents in a case under the Domestic Violence Act and the application of Section 66 of the Indian Evidence Act.
Notice to produce document—Whether there exists such document or not cannot be adjudicated at the time of passing orders under Section 66 of Indian Evidence Act.
The main legal point established is that issues raised prematurely and based on separate acquittals cannot automatically warrant the quashing of a complaint under the PWDV Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to devise its own procedure for disposal of an application under Section 28(2) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Viole....
Point of law: In any case, it is settled legal position that no litigant can be denied the opportunity to prove his case, unless it is clear that presence of such witnesses is not necessary at all. T....
High Courts must adopt hands-off approach quashing DV Act proceedings under Section 482 CrPC, interfering only for gross illegality/abuse; treat allegations as true, avoid mini-trials or evidence ass....
Secondary evidence is admissible under Section 65 of the Evidence Act when original documents are not available, and a plaint disclosing a cause of action must be read in its entirety.
The court has the power under section 151 CPC to allow additional evidence to be brought on record, with caution and care, to meet the ends of justice, even if there is no specific provision in the C....
Judicial officers should not be impleaded in writ petitions, and applications under Order XI must be timely and relevant to the case.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
