Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Suresh vs Ramya Devi

Suresh vs Ramya Devi

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Orders Decided Oct 30, 2025
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1735653

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai Orders High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
CRP/537/2024

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Suresh

Respondent

Ramya Devi

Excerpt

.....2 of 52 to 5 under the domestic violence act in dvc no.10 of 2022 on the file of judicial magistrate, cheyyar. after receipt of notice, the petitioner filed this civil revision petition seeking to strike of the said complaint, mainly on the ground that the averments made in the above complaint are not sufficient to take cognizance by the magistrate regarding the allegations raised under the domestic violence act.3. in view of the law settled by this court arul daniel and othersversus suganya reported in (2022) scc online mad 5435, if the petitioner isaggrieved by the initiation of the proceedings under the domestic violence act, it is for him to move the very same magistrate raising preliminary issues like absence of shared house hold, domestic violence, etc. hence, this court is not inclined to exercise its supervisory power available under article 227 of constitution of india to strike off the complaint.4. accordingly, this civil revision petition is dismissed. there shall be noorder as to costs. connected miscellaneous petition is closed. the petitioner isat liberty to move the concerned magistrate for getting appropriate remedy as per law laid down in arun daniel case. 30-10-2025 internet: yes index: yes/no neutral citation: yes/no mst 3 of 5 to the district munsif cum judicial magistrate, pochampalli, krishnagiri district. 4 of 5 s.sounthar j. mst 30-10-2025 5 of 5

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30-10-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S. SOUNTHAR CRP No. 537 of 2024 and CMP No.2628 of 2024

1. SURESH S/o.Annamalai, 13/42, Chetty Street, Kumananchavadi, Kundrathur Road, Petitioner(s) Poonamallee, Chennai Vs

1. Ramya Devi

W/o.Suresh, D/o.Natarajan, Cheyyar, Tiruvannamalai District 2.ANNAMALAI S/o.Vethachelam, 13/42, Chetty Street, 3.MALA W/o.Annamalai, 13/42, Chetty Street, 4.MANIKANDAN S/o.Annamalai, 13/42, Chetty Street, 1 of 5 5.SANGEETHA W/o.Palani, No.72, Sengunthar Street, VTC Palaseevaram, Palaseevaram, Kancheepuram District (Respondents 2 to 5 are no necessary parties to file a Civil Revision petition Respondent(s) hence notice may be dispense with) PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India to call for the records pertaining to the petition in DVC No.10 of 2022 pending on the file of the Learned Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyar and strike out the petitioners name and the same as abuse process of law and quash the same by allowing the present CRP. For Petitioner(s): Mr. T.Muruganantham

ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition is filed seeking to strike of the complaint preferred by the first respondent under the provision of the Domestic Violence Act. nd rd

2. The petitioner is husband of the first respondent. The 2 and 3

th th respondents are parents and 4 and 5 respondents are siblings of the petitioner. The first respondent filed a complaint against the petitioner and the respondents 2 of 5

2 to 5 under the domestic violence Act in DVC No.10 of 2022 on the file of Judicial Magistrate, Cheyyar. After receipt of notice, the petitioner filed this civil revision petition seeking to strike of the said complaint, mainly on the ground that the averments made in the above complaint are not sufficient to take cognizance by the Magistrate regarding the allegations raised under the Domestic Violence Act.

3. In view of the Law settled by this Court Arul Daniel and Others

Versus Suganya reported in (2022) SCC Online Mad 5435, if the petitioner is

aggrieved by the initiation of the proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act, it is for him to move the very same Magistrate raising preliminary issues like absence of shared house hold, domestic violence, etc. Hence, this court is not inclined to exercise its Supervisory Power available under Article 227 of Constitution of India to strike off the complaint.

4. Accordingly, this civil revision petition is dismissed. There shall be no

order as to costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed. The petitioner is

at liberty to move the concerned Magistrate for getting appropriate remedy as per law laid down in Arun Daniel case. 30-10-2025 Internet: yes Index: Yes/No Neutral citation: Yes/No MST 3 of 5 To The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pochampalli, Krishnagiri District. 4 of 5 S.SOUNTHAR J. MST 30-10-2025 5 of 5

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial