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

2021 Supreme(Mad) 1650

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
K. MURALI SHANKAR, J.
P. Ganesan & Another – Appellants
Versus
M. Revathy Prema Rubarani & Another – Respondents
C.R.P.PD(MD). Nos. 909 & 915 of 2021 & CMP(MD)Nos. 5177 & 5178 of 2021
Decided on : 27-09-2021

Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Z. Pinayagash, Robert Chandra Kumar, Advocates.

Headnote:

Constitution of India,1950 - Article 227 and 141 - Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 - Sections 482, 126 and 468 - Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 - Sections 12, 20, 21 , 31 , 22 , 31 18, 19, 20, 21, 27, 28 , 32 , and 22 - Seeking orders for setting aside the proceedings - maintenance amount - Petitioner marriage between himself and the respondent was solemnized that due to misunderstanding between them, respondent got separated from the petitioner and they were living separately for the past 10 years, that respondent has filed a petition - Sole intention to harass petitioner, that respondent had already collected her jewels from petitioner petitioner has been regularly paying the maintenance amount per month respondent has been receiving the same, that respondent has filed a petition on file of Chief Judicial Magistrate - respondent has initiated the proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act, abusing the process of law and that proceedings – Held, Court is not inclined to stay the further proceedings of the cases pending before learned Judicial Magistrates - Judgment of this Court been specifically observed in the guidelines issued therein that personal appearance of the petitioners shall not be ordinarily insisted upon, if parties are effectively represented through counsel and that Form - VII of Domestic Violence Rules makes it clear that the parties can appear before the Magistrate either in person or through duly authorized counsel - Petitioners fail to appear either in person or through their counsel, Magistrate can only proceed to set ex-parte and then to decide the application and therefore, it is not mandatory for revision petitioners to appear personally for all hearings - Learned Judicial Magistrates are directed not to insist personal appearance of petitioners as per the guidelines referred above for the hearing in which, the personal appearance of the petitioners is not necessary – Ordered Accordingly

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed Article 227 of Constitution of India, to call for the records pertaining to the petition in DVC.No.26 of 2020 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tirunelveli and set aside the same.

Civil Revision Petition filed Article 227 of Constitution of India, to set aside the petition in DVC.No.8 of 2021 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kovilpatti.)

1. The Civil Revision Petition in C.R.P.PD(MD)No.909 of 2021 has been filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, seeking orders for setting aside the proceedings in D.V.C.No.26 of 2020, initiated under the provisions of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tirunelveli.

2. The Civil Revision Petition in C.R.P.PD(MD)No.915 of 2021 has been filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, seeking orders for quashing the proceedings in D.V.C.No.8 of 2021, initiated under the provisions of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kovilpatti.

3. The case of the petitioner in C.R.P.PD(MD)No.909 of 2021 is that the marriage between himself and the respondent was solemnized on 27.05.1996, that due to misunderstanding between them, the respondent got separated from the petitioner on 18.07.2010 and they were living separately for the past 10 years, that the respondent has filed a petition in D.V.C.No.26 of 2020 on the file of the Court of Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tirunelveli with sole intention to harass the petitioner, that the respondent had already collected her jewels from the petitioner on 30.01.2020, that the petitioner has been regularly paying the maintenance amount of Rs.10,000/- per month from 14.11.2017 and the respondent has been receiving the same, that the respondent has filed a petition in Crl.M.P.No.5055 of 2020 in M.C.No.1 of 2016 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tirunelveli for enhancement of maintenance and the same is pending, that the respondent has initiated the proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act, abusing the process of law and that therefore, the proceedings in D.V.C.No.26 of 2020 on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Tirunelveli are liable to be set aside.

4. The case of the petitioner in C.R.P.PD(MD)No.915 of 2021 is that the marriage between himself and the respondent was solemnized on 24.06.2020, that the petitioner has already filed a petition in H.M.O.P.No.29 of 2021 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Kovilpatti for restitution of conjugal rights and the same is pending, that the respondent has sent a reply notice dated 26.11.2020, seeking mutual divorce, but subsequently, she has filed a case under the Domestic Violence Act against her husband and in-laws, that the learned Magistrate has rightly refused to take cognizance as against the parents of the petitioner, that the respondent has initiated the above proceedings with sole intention to harass the petitioner and her aged parents and that therefore, the proceedings pending in D.V.C.No.8 of 2021 on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kovilpatti are liable to be quashed.

5. Previously, Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was invoked for challenging the proceedings initiated under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrates, before this Court. In a batch of Criminal Original Petitions filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, in Dr.P.Pathmanathan and others Vs. Tmt.Monica and another, the Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.Anand Venkatesh, has passed a common order dated 18.01.2021, reported in 2021 (2) CTC 57, holding that Section 482 Cr.P.C cannot be applied to quash the applications filed under Section 12 of Domestic Violence Act, but on the other hand, Article 227 of the Indian Constitution can be invoked.

6. The learned Judge has also formulated certain guidelines/

                  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