Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Respondent being directed to build or provide something for the petitioner under the Domestic Violence Act The Domestic Violence Act, 2005, primarily grants reliefs to women who are victims of domestic violence, including protection orders, residence rights, and monetary relief. It does not explicitly empower courts to direct respondents to build or construct something for the petitioner. The reliefs are generally focused on safety, shelter, maintenance, and prohibitory orders. There is no mention in the provided sources that a respondent can be directed to build or construct physical infrastructure or property for the petitioner under this Act. ["Sanjeev Batra VS Simranjeet Kaur - Delhi"] discusses acts of domestic violence and court orders related to protection and maintenance but does not mention any direction to build or construct. ["Muvva Bhargav VS State of Andhra Pradesh - Crimes"], which defines domestic violence and the scope of reliefs, emphasizes protection, residence, and monetary relief but does not include any provisions for directing construction or building activities. ["GITIKA BARMAN D/O LATE MUKUNDA BARMAN VS SANJEEV BARMAN S/O SHRI UPENDRAJIT BARMAN - Gauhati"], ["Vicky Manoj Shah vs Kanal Vicky Shah - Bombay"], and other sources focus on protection orders, residence rights, and interim reliefs but do not specify that a respondent can be directed to build or do something physical for the petitioner.
Main Points and Insights
The reliefs are primarily aimed at safety, shelter, and financial support, not physical construction or infrastructure development.
Analysis and Conclusion Based on the provided sources, a respondent cannot be directed to build or construct something for the petitioner under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The Act's scope is limited to protective and relief measures such as protection orders, residence rights, and maintenance. Any direction to build or construct would fall outside the legislative intent and provisions of the Act.References: ["Sanjeev Batra VS Simranjeet Kaur - Delhi"], ["Muvva Bhargav VS State of Andhra Pradesh - Crimes"], ["GITIKA BARMAN D/O LATE MUKUNDA BARMAN VS SANJEEV BARMAN S/O SHRI UPENDRAJIT BARMAN - Gauhati"], ["Vicky Manoj Shah vs Kanal Vicky Shah - Bombay"]
In the realm of family law, the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act) stands as a vital shield for women facing violence in domestic relationships. But what if a petitioner seeks more than protection or financial support—say, a direction for the respondent to build a structure like a room or house? Can a court issue such an order under the DV Act?
This question often arises in heated domestic disputes where petitioners push for tangible infrastructural remedies. Generally, the DV Act focuses on immediate civil reliefs to ensure safety and support, not long-term construction mandates. Let's break it down step by step, drawing from key provisions, judicial interpretations, and related case insights.
Enacted to provide effective civil remedies to women victims of domestic violence, the DV Act aims to protect rights and prevent family violence. Indra Sarma VS V. K. V. Sarma - 2013 8 Supreme 122Shaurabh Kumar Tripathi VS Vidhi Rawal - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 873Satish Chander Ahuja VS Sneha Ahuja - 2020 6 Supreme 613. Its legislative object emphasizes safeguards like protection, residence, and financial aid, not developmental projects.
The Act defines domestic violence broadly but limits remedies to specific categories. As courts have clarified, it's a protective and remedial statute, not one for infrastructural enforcement. Indra Sarma VS V. K. V. Sarma - 2013 8 Supreme 122
The DV Act empowers Magistrates to grant targeted reliefs under Sections 18 to 22. Here's a breakdown:
Notably, no section authorizes courts to direct the respondent to build or construct anything. Indra Sarma VS V. K. V. Sarma - 2013 8 Supreme 122Shaurabh Kumar Tripathi VS Vidhi Rawal - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 873. Remedies are explicitly civil and relief-oriented, excluding physical infrastructure.
Courts have consistently held that the DV Act's scope is confined to listed reliefs. In multiple judgments, it's emphasized that orders must align with the Act's object: protection from violence, ensuring safety, residence, and financial support—not construction. Indra Sarma VS V. K. V. Sarma - 2013 8 Supreme 122Shaurabh Kumar Tripathi VS Vidhi Rawal - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 873Satish Chander Ahuja VS Sneha Ahuja - 2020 6 Supreme 613Ajay Kumar VS Uma - 2024 0 Supreme(Del) 89.
For instance, the remedies under the DV Act are civil in nature and do not include directions to build or construct. Indra Sarma VS V. K. V. Sarma - 2013 8 Supreme 122. Similarly, reliefs do not extend to building or infrastructural orders. Shaurabh Kumar Tripathi VS Vidhi Rawal - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 873.
Related jurisprudence reinforces this:- Residence rights in a shared household are protected, even without title, but this doesn't extend to new builds. Every woman in a domestic relationship has a right to reside there, absent violence acts. Hoshiar Singh VS Sarla Devi - 2023 Supreme(HP) 334- Courts prioritize evidence of domestic violence for any relief; unsubstantiated claims fail. For relief under the PWDVA, the complainant must substantiate claims of domestic violence with evidence, not merely rely on cross-examination denials. Nutan Thakur vs Shiv Nath Thakur- Conflicts with other laws, like the Senior Citizens Act, highlight DV Act's focus on residence protection, not expansion. Hiral Valjibhai Bhua VS Manjulaben Manjibhai Savaliya
The Act's remedies are expressly limited to Sections 18-22. Requests for construction fall outside this jurisdiction:- No clause mandates physical work or infrastructural benefits. Indra Sarma VS V. K. V. Sarma - 2013 8 Supreme 122- Such demands resemble specific performance suits, better suited for civil courts.- DV proceedings require proof of domestic violence and a live domestic relationship. Bhagwati Bai VS Kavita - 2022 Supreme(MP) 268Ramesh Chandra Sharma VS Meena - 2020 Supreme(MP) 15. For example, complaints against distant relatives (e.g., sisters-in-law never sharing a household) are quashed for lacking domestic relationship. Zeba Mohasin Pathan @ Zeba Easak Pathan VS State of Maharashtra - 2024 Supreme(Bom) 49
In one case, even electricity connections were ordered without owner consent, but only because no 'no objection' was needed—yet residence claims failed if not a shared household. Gautam s/o Sambhaji Narnaware VS Archana w/o Sunil Narnaware - 2017 Supreme(Bom) 2466. This underscores: no automatic rights beyond defined reliefs.
While direct construction orders are absent, courts may indirectly support residence via monetary relief for rent/alternatives. However:- No exceptions authorize building mandates. Shaurabh Kumar Tripathi VS Vidhi Rawal - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 873- Overlaps with CrPC Section 125 (maintenance) exist, but DV Act is additional, not expansive. Section 36 clarifies it's not in derogation of any other law. Gajanan S/o Parashram Rathod VS Surekha Gajanan Rathod - 2023 Supreme(Bom) 41- Eviction disputes (e.g., under Senior Citizens Act) don't override DV residence rights but don't create construction powers. Hiral Valjibhai Bhua VS Manjulaben Manjibhai Savaliya
Petitioners pressing for builds risk petition dismissal for lacking evidence or scope. Nutan Thakur vs Shiv Nath Thakur
If infrastructural relief is needed:1. File a separate civil suit for specific performance, injunction, or mandatory orders.2. Pursue maintenance under CrPC Section 125 alongside DV remedies.3. Negotiate via family courts or mediation for property division.
Focus DV applications on core reliefs: protection, residence, and monetary aid for quicker, effective outcomes.
The DV Act empowers women with essential civil tools against domestic violence but draws a clear line at construction orders. This ensures focused, efficient justice without overstepping into unrelated civil domains. While interpretations may evolve, current jurisprudence firmly limits scope. Satish Chander Ahuja VS Sneha Ahuja - 2020 6 Supreme 613
Disclaimer: This post provides general information based on legal precedents and is not specific legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your situation, as outcomes depend on facts and jurisdiction.
References:1. Indra Sarma VS V. K. V. Sarma - 2013 8 Supreme 122: Remedies are civil, no construction directions.2. Shaurabh Kumar Tripathi VS Vidhi Rawal - 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 873: Reliefs do not extend to infrastructural orders.3. Satish Chander Ahuja VS Sneha Ahuja - 2020 6 Supreme 613: Emphasizes protection, residence, monetary support.
#DVActIndia, #DomesticViolenceLaw, #WomenRightsLaw
Thus, respondent no. 1 has also detailed out specific acts of domestic violence attributable to petitioner no. 2 including physical abuse as well as verbal and emotional abuse. 18. ... By way of order dated 17.08.2020, the petitioner no. 1 was directed to file his income affidavit, since the case of respondent no. 1 was that petitioner no. 1 is the biological father of her child i.e. respondent no. 2 and was thus liable to pay her m....
Section 3 of the Act reads thus:— “Definition of domestic violence:- For the purposes of this Act, any at, omission or commission or conduct of the respondent shall constitute domestic violence in case it- (a) harms or injures or endangers the health, safety, life ... Elucidating Section 2(a) which defines the term aggrieved person, Supreme Court observed that apart from the woman, who is in a domestic relationship, any woman, who has been in a #HL....
under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005. ... It was argued that the evidence of the respondent containing the documents on record, per se established commission of offence of domestic violence and since Domestic Violence Act is a beneficial legislation, it had to be interpreted liberally. ... The same reads as under: "...2(a) "aggrieved person" means any woman who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the....
It is the submission of the learned Senior Counsel that, the petitioner being the wife of the respondent, she is entitled to have separate accommodation in terms of the provision under Section 17 of the Protection of Women from the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short, “D.V.”Act). ... Therefore, when any woman is in a domestic relationship as discussed above, is subjected to any act of domestic violence and becom....
By the impugned order, the present Petitioner-Husband and his family members are restrained from causing any act amounting to domestic violence towards the Respondent-Wife and minor daughter and the present Petitioner-Husband has been directed to shift to alternate accommodation till disposal of the ... Act is that aggrieved person has been subjected to domestic violence. As already noted herein above, “aggrieved p....
Learned Trial Court vide order dated 13.9.2017 allowed the complaint of respondent under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and passed the following orders:- (a) That respondent is prohibited from committing any act of domestic violence; (b) ... In other words, every woman in a domestic relationship has a right to reside in the shared household even in the absence of any act of domestic....
As per Section 2(a) of the DV Act "aggrieved person" means any woman who is, or has been, in a 'domestic relationship' with the respondent and who alleges to have been subjected to any act of 'domestic violence by the respondent'; As per Section 2(f), "domestic relationship" means a relationship between ... Further, 'domestic violence' under Section 3 of the DV Act means any act....
Thus, the averments in the complaint themselves do not bring the 2nd and 3rd Petitioner within the scope and ambit of the definition of ‘aggrieved person’, ‘domestic violence’, ‘respondent’ or ‘shared household’ in the DV Act. ... —In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,— (a) “aggrieved person” means any woman who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the respondent and who alleges to have been subjected to any act#HL....
(2) If the Magistrate is satisfied that an application prima facie discloses that the respondent is committing, or has committed an act of domestic violence or that there is a likelihood that the respondent may commit an act of domestic violence, he may grant an ex-parte order ... Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalbari in respect of committing ‘domestic violence’ upon the petitioner by the ....
The learned Judicial Magistrate, therefore, recorded the reasons whether the domestic violence was committed are not fall under the shadow of doubt and accordingly held that there was no domestic violence against the applicant and refused the relief to the petitioner under D.V. Act. ... Act but has at any point of time leave or had the right to leave and has been subjected to domestic violence or is later subjected to dome....
Various efforts have been made to dispossess the petitioner from the shared household. A complaint has been filed by her mother in law under the Land Grabbing Act. 2.2. The petitioner - wife and the husband are engaged in several litigations inasmuch as FIRs have been filed by him as well as the petitioner and the Petitioner was once arrested in the case of an FIR filed by her husband and then released on bail. Proceedings under the Protection Of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short ‘the Domestic Violence Act’) have been initiated by the petitioner wherein the Petition....
After giving birth to a female child in the year 2009, the family members of the petitioners have harassed her and then she lodged an FIR which was registered bearing Crime No.97/2009. Respondent no.1 filed a complaint under the domestic violence against the present petitioner. The petitioners are sisters-in-law of respondent and respondent No.1 filed the complaint due to cruelty, harassment on behalf of respondents including the petitioner.
The respondent is permanently prohibited from committing any act of the Domestic Violence to the petitioner" Respondent No.1 is restrained from dispossessing the petitioner from the shared household and from renouncing his rights in the shared household, except with the leave of the Court.
Domestic relationship is defined under the Act in section 2(f) as under: 6. In the present petition, the respondent taking shelter of domestic relationship and domestic violence under the Domestic Violence Act.
The petitioner being a Senior Citizen, it is expected from the police authorities to see that there is no nuisance caused by respondent no.1 to the petitioner and the petitioner leads peaceful life as a Senior Citizen. The police authorities shall be at liberty to take such appropriate action against respondent No.1 as is permissible in law, in the event if such occasion arises. 8. In view of the aforesaid position, it is open for the petitioner to institute the proceedings for eviction of respondent No.1 from the premises and merely because the proceedings are filed under the prov....
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
