Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
M.M. NERLIKAR
Suresh, s/o Kahiram Mapari – Appellant
Versus
Ranjana Ashok Polkar (styled as Ranjana Suresh Mapari in complaint) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to domestic violence act application on lack of relationship (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments on nature of relationship under domestic violence act (Para 4 , 5 , 8) |
| 3. procedure for determining domestic relationships and claims (Para 6 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. guidelines for identifying relationship in nature of marriage (Para 12 , 14 , 15) |
| 5. dismissal of petition and impact on trial court hearings (Para 16 , 18 , 19) |
JUDGMENT :
M.M. NERLIKAR, J.
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of both the learned counsel for the parties.
(2) By this petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 21.05.2025 passed below Exhibit 10 in PWDV No.16/2023, by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.1, Washim, wherein the Exhibit 10 filed by the present petitioner, came to be rejected. Further, the petitioner is praying for quashing of the entire proceedings filed under the Protection from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (“Domestic Violence Act”) which is pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class.
(3) The learned counsel for petitioner submits that Exhibit 10 was filed by the petitioner raising preliminary objection in respect of the maintainability
A live-in relationship does not automatically equate to a domestic relationship under the Domestic Violence Act; evidence of commitment and recognition akin to marriage is necessary.
(1) In order to maintain a petition under DV Act aggrieved person has to show that aggrieved person and respondent (man) lived together in a shared household and this could be even from a relationshi....
(1) In order to maintain a petition under DV Act aggrieved person has to show that aggrieved person and respondent (man) lived together in a shared household and this could be even from a relationshi....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the crucial role of evidence in determining the nature of the relationship and the entitlement to protection under the DV Act.
Grant of interim maintenance – Denial of relationship of husband and wife – Evidence to be adduced during trial – No interference required
A domestic relationship under the D.V. Act requires actual or past residence in a shared household, and mere visits do not suffice to establish such a relationship.
The court clarified that domestic relationship claims under the Act require rigorous factual scrutiny and evidence, especially regarding the existence of prior marriages and relationships.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement to relief under the PWDV Act based on the finding of a domestic relationship, and the permissibility of adjustment of maintenance a....
Maintenance – Existence of domestic relationship either by marriage or in nature of marriage is sine qua non to maintenance action under Section 12 of Act.
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
