Domestic violence petitions must substantiate new claims, as previous compromises bar re-litigation of settled issues.

O R D E R

The present civil revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India seeking to strike of the domestic violation petition in DVC.No.28 of 2024 on the file of the Additional Mahila (Fast Track Court) No.II, Nagercoil.

(A)Facts leading to the filing of this civil revision petition are as follows:

2.The first petitioner is the husband of the respondent. The other two petitioners are the sisters of the first petitioner. The first petitioner who is a Homoeopathy Doctor by profession has got married to the respondent on 08.06.2017. They were blessed with a son on 31.08.2018. Due to matrimonial dispute, they got separated on 07.08.2019. The husband had filed IDOP.No.51 of 2020 on the file of the District Court, Nagercoil for the relief of divorce on 03.02.2020. It was transferred to the Family Court and renumbered as IDOP.No.114 of 2021 in January 2021.

3.The wife had lodged an F.I.R as against the husband and a case was registered in Crime No.34 of 2021 on 31.05.2021. A charge sheet was laid in C.C.No.515 of 2022 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Kuzhithurai as against the respondent.

4.The couple had entered into a compromise on 25.11.2022 before a notary public. The wife had agreed that she had received all the jewels from the husband. The husband had agreed to repay a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- to the wife which he is said to have borrowed from the wife's family. The husband also agreed to pay a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- as permanent maintenance to the wife and son. The wife had agreed to withdraw DVC.No.8 of 2020. She had also agreed for quashing of C.C.No. 515 of 2022 by filing a joint compromise memo before the High Court. It was further agreed that no further criminal or civil proceedings shall be initiated as against each other. It was agreed between them that the child would remain in the custody of the mother. It was further agreed that IDOP.No.114 of 2021 can be converted into an application for divorce on mutual consent and they agreed to get divorce.

5.This compromise agreement entered into before the notary was referred to in the counter affidavit filed by the wife in IDOP.No.114 of 2021 and she had agreed for granting of divorce. IDOP.No.114 of 2020 was referred to mediation before the Family Court, Padmanabhapuram. The compromise entered into between the parties before the notary public on 25.11.2022 was referred and another compromise was recorded before the mediation centre of the Family Court on 03.05.2023. Relying upon the compromise before the mediation, DVC.No.8 of 2020 was dismissed as not pressed by the wife on 05.10.2023.

6.Challenging DVC.No.8 of 2020, the husband had filed Crl.O.P.No.15997 of 2020 and the sisters of the husband have filed Crl.O.P.(MD).No.13982 of 2020. Both these criminal original petitions were dismissed as infructuous on 13.10.2023 on the ground that DVC.No. 8 of 2020 has been not pressed by the wife.

7.The husband had filed Crl.O.P(MD).No.1671 of 2023 to quash C.C.No.515 of 2022 as agreed by the parties before the mediation in IDOP.No.114 of 2021 on the file of the Family Court, Padmanabhapuram. In the said quash petition, a joint compromise memo was filed by both the parties. The said compromise memo was signed by both the parties and their respective counsels.

8.When the quash petition came up for hearing on 13.10.2023, the learned counsel appearing for the wife submitted that though a demand draft for a sum of Rs.40,00,000/- was taken by her husband, it was not handed over to her. It was further