SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2013 Supreme(Mad) 1273

High Court of Judicature at Madras
C.S. KARNAN, J.
Dr. K.J. Mathiyalagan & Another
Versus
Ms. Dhivya
Crl.R.C.No. 906 of 2012 & M.P.Nos. 1 & 2 of 2012
Decided On : 11-03-2013

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners:G. Krishnamoorthy for T.S. Selvarani, Advocates.
For the Respondent:R. Sankarasubbu, T.K.S. Gandhi, Advocates.

Headnote:

Domestic Violence - Accommodation - Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act - Section 17, 19, 20, 22

Fact of the Case:

The respondent, a law student, sought accommodation in her father's house under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, claiming to be the daughter of the first revision petitioner. The trial court granted relief for shared household, which was modified by the appellate court to provide alternate accommodation and rent payment to the respondent.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the respondent's relationship with the first revision petitioner as his daughter was confirmed by a maintenance order and a petition for restitution of conjugal rights filed by her mother. The court also emphasized the rights of an illegitimate child and the need to avoid stigmatizing language.

Issues: The main issues were the respondent's entitlement to accommodation under the Domestic Violence Act and the nature of her relationship with the first revision petitioner.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the respondent, confirmed as the daughter of the first revision petitioner, was entitled to accommodation under the Domestic Violence Act. The court also emphasized the equal rights of illegitimate children and the need to avoid stigmatizing language.

Final Decision: The court confirmed the modified order of the appellate court, directing the first revision petitioner to provide accommodation and pay rent to the respondent. The court also emphasized the need for the first revision petitioner to comply with the order and pay maintenance regularly to the respondent.

Judgment :-

1. The respondent herein / petitioner, viz., Miss.M.Dhivya had filed a complaint, in Crl.M.P.No.1945 of 2010, on the file of XVII Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, against the revision petitioners herein and two others, viz., M.Prem Anand and M.Deepak Anand, stating that she is studying in the second year of the Five year law course at Dr.Ambedkar Law College, Chennai and living under the care and custody of her mother, Mrs.Usha Rani, in a rented house. She further stated that her father, Dr.K.J.Mathiazhagan married her mother Usha Rani, as per Hindu Customs and Rites on 21.11.1991 at Tirupathi, in the presence of relatives and friends, and the marriage reception was held at Hotel Palmgrove, Nungambakkam, Chennai. At the time of marriage, her father was a serving doctor as Ortho Surgeon in K.M.C.Hospital, Chennai. Out of wedlock, she was born on 15.08.1992. In the month of June 1993, her mother came to know that her husband had already married another woman, i.e., the second respondent / second revision petitioner herein viz., Mrs. Girija Devi. The same had been suppressed by her father. Her mother had raised the objections regarding suppression of first marriage with the second respondent/second revision petitioner. Then, the father of the respondent herein had convinced her mother and all the family members stating that the past could not be reset and everything would turn out to be alright. The respondent herein further stated that her father had requested her mother not to initiate any legal action, since he is a Government doctor and that his profession would be affected. The respondent / Divya further stated that the revision petitioners herein are her father and her aunt / (periamma in tamil), and that the third and fourth respondents are her blood brothers in the eyes of law and society.

2. The respondent herein / petitioner further stated that her mother, viz., Usha Rani has filed H.M.O.P.No.1314 of 1995 against the first revision petitioner herein for restitution of conjugal rights. At the time of hearing before the Family Court, her father was prepared to settle the issue out of Court and her father agreed to pay a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- to her mother Usha Rani and he promised to extend his co-operation for providing her education and other amenities. Subsequently, her mother filed maintenance case in M.C.No.114 of 2007, on behalf of her minor daughter and suit for declaration in O.S.No.168 of 2007, against the first revision petitioner herein / Dr.Mathiyalagan. At the time of hearing, her father agreed to pay a sum of Rs.4,72,000/-for full and final settlement. This did not materialise due to the unwillingness of the second and fourth respondents to effect such a compromise. The respondent herein / petitioner further stated that her father has a own house bearing door No.15, New No.6, Vaigai Street, Chinmaya Nagar, Stage-II, Virugambakkam, Chennai-92, consisting of ground floor and first floor. The house property spreads over an extent of 1 ground 300 Sqft. All the respondents have prevented the respondent from entering into her father's property.

3. The respondent herein / petitioner further stated that her living status is in a pathetic state and that she is unable to continue her studies since she is living as a tenant. Her father also has lot of immovable properties. Therefore, she has sought accommodation for herself in the said house. She further stated that her father also had accepted her as his daughter. She has further stated that her mother Usha Rani was aged 49 years old and that she is unemployed and has no source of income to maintain her. Therefore, she has stated that she is willing to living with her father in her father's place, but her father's first wife and her children had not allowed her to live with her father. Therefore, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondents to provide her accommodation in her father's house under Section 18, 19, 20 and 22 of the Protection


































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top