Court affirmed there was no illegal confinement and encouraged amicable resolution in domestic quarrels.

(Order of the Court was made by C.V.Karthikeyan, J.)

The petition has been filed by the mother, complaining that when she went over to her daughter's house, she was not permitted to speak to her daughter. The fourth respondent is the petitioner's son-in-law.

2. Since the daughter is not under illegal confinement and the matter appears to be a domestic quarrel or a personal issue between the mother and daughter and/or the son-in-law, we had requested the learned Principal District Judge, Dindigul, to make necessary arrangements for all parties to appear before us through video conferencing. Accordingly, the petitioner, her daughter, her son-in-law, her grandson, and the learned counsel for the petitioner are present. A Constable attached to the All Women Police Station, Nilakottai Taluk, Dindigul District, is also present.

3. We are confident that the issues between the petitioner, the fourth respondent, and her daughter would be settled amicably over passage of time. We are satisfied that the daughter of the petitioner is not under illegal confinement. Hence, the Habeas Corpus Petition stands closed.