Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.B. Balaji, J
DHILIPKUMAR S/o.Raghuraman – Appellant
Versus
Selisha @ Umamaheswari W/o.Dhilipkumar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction of revision petitions regarding domestic violence. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments against the domestic violence complaint concerning vagueness and malafide intentions. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. context of residential accommodation and conditions proposed. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. legal standing and necessity for trials regarding accusations. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. court's consideration on the merits of allegations against family members. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
COMMON ORDER
2. I have heard Mr.P.V.Muralidharan, learned counsel for the petitioner in CRP.No.2273/2025 and MR.N.Palanikumar, learned counsel for the petitioner in CRP.No.1028/2025 and Mrs S. Bhargavi Gopalan, learned counsel for the respondent in both the revisions.
4. It is also contended by the petitioner that the DVC complaint has been filed with malafide intention to harass the petitioners and there is absolutely no merit in the allegations made in the DVC complaint. It is also stated that the wife has been living separately from the husband for over ten years, and the domestic violence complaint is also be barred by limitation. It is also the contention of the petitioner that the proceedings for divorce have already be
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
