Court : Chennai
..... dispositions: 24.at the outset, it is to be pointed out that in s.t.c.no.1777 of 2009, the respondents (wife and children) as petitioners have filed a petition/application under section 12 of the protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005 seeking the following reliefs as against the revision petitioner/husband: i].protection order under section - 18 i)prohibiting the respondent from committing any act of domestic violence against the petitioner; ii)prohibiting the respondent from committing any act of domestic violence against the parents and brother of the petitioner including filing false complaint against them by utilizing the cheques belong to ..... them which are now kept by the respondent; iii) prohibiting the respondent from alienating the assets/ properties stand in his name; iv) prohibiting .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... the short facts of the case are as follows:- the petitioner / wife has filed a petition under section 12 r/w section 18(a), (b), (d), section (19)(1)(f), 19(8), section 20(1), section 22 of the protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005, along with an affidavit praying for (a) protection order: preventing the respondent from (a) committing any act of domestic violence, (b) aiding or abetting in the commission of acts of domestic violence, (c) attempting to communicate with the petitioner; in any form whatsoever, (b) residence order: (a) direct the respondent to secure same level of alternate accommodation as enjoyed by the petitioner in the shared household or to pay rent of rs.7,500/- per month for a similar accommodation ..... that the appellate court has failed to consider that according to section 23(2) of the protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005, the learned magistrate is allowed to pass even an ex-parte interim order if he is satisfied that a prima facie case of domestic violence exists, based on the affidavits submitted before him. ..... that he had not committed any domestic violence against the petitioner and that the complaint had been filed against him only for the purpose of extracting lumpsum payment from him and his family members. ..... observed that as per section 12(1) of the act, whenever, the application is filed under section 12(1) r/w 23 of the act, the trial court is bound to consider the domestic incidental report for passing any order. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... the first respondent.3.based on the above mentioned allegation, the revision petitioner filed a petition under sections 18, 19 and 23 of the protection of women from domestic violence act 2005 for the following reliefs:-(i)protection order under section 18 of the said act, prohibiting the respondent no.1 and 2 from committing any act of domestic violence on the revision petitioner and prohibiting the respondent no.1 from alienating the property bearing door no.6 nagalingam pillai street, thiruchuli road, arupukkottai, virudhunagar district, which ..... the petitioner claims to be a shared household;(ii)restraining the respondents 1 and 2 from dispossessing or in any other manner disturbing ..... the findings of the trial court that the revision petitioner had not made out any prima facie case for any of the reliefs sought for under sections 18, 19 and 23 of the protection of women from domestic violence act 2005.6.the learned appellate judge has adverted to the transactions that took place subsequent to the death of the husband of the revision petitioner and also referred .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... : mr.y.krishnan ^for respondent : mr.s.palanivelayutham :order the petitioner is the respondent in cr.m.p.no.8269 of 2013, filed under section 31 of the protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005, (in short "dv act"), seeking enforcement of the order dated 11.02.2011 made in cr.m.p.no.7910 of 2010, ..... that sub-section (2) of section 23 of the dv act, speaks about the grant of exparte order on the basis of the affidavit in such form as may be prescribed, of the aggrieved person under section 18, section 19, section 20, section 21 or, as the case may be, section 22 of the dv act against the respondent and therefore, the impugned order passed under section 23 of the dv act is to be construed as a protection order under section 18 of the act and in that event, the petition filed under section 31 of the dv act, is perfectly ..... act, deals with 'domestic violence' and section 3 defines 'domestic violence ..... section 2(g) of the dv act defines 'domestic violence' and it has been the same meaning as assigned to it in section 3 of the dv act ..... it is the submission of the learned counsel for the revision petitioner that the impugned order passed under section 23 of the dv act, under the present facts and circumstances of the case, cannot be construed as a protection order as defined under section 18 of the dv act, for the reason that sub-clause (e) of section 18 of the dv act, only speaks about alienating any assets, operating bank lockers or bank accounts used for held or enjoyed .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... judge, after hearing the arguments of the appellants / revision petitioners and the respondent herein, partly allowed the appeal, by modifying the order dated 23.06.2011 passed by the xvii metropolitan magistrate, saidapet, in crl.m.p.no.1945 of 2010, for alternate accommodation under section 19 of the protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005 instead of the relief of shared household granted under section 17 of the said act and directed the appellants / revision petitioners to pay a sum of rs.15,000/- towards rent to the respondent herein with effect ..... learned judge had assigned the reason that alternate accommodation should be given as per section 19 of protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005, instead of the relief of the shared house hold granted under section 17 of the said act, and as such, the above order has been passed, which is sustainable under law.17. ..... the learned appellate judge ordered accommodation as per section 19 of protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005, which is not relevant in the instant case as even as per the contentions of the respondent, she is an illegitimate child of the first revision ..... , the learned magistrate passed an order granting the relief under section 17 of the protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005 for shared household.7. ..... the above discussions, this court considers that in the language of section 17, and 19 (f) of the protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005, it is seen that "17. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... " 21.repelling the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned counsel for the first respondent/wife submits that the learned judicial magistrate has passed final orders in d.v.o.p.no.29 of 2012 on 21.09.2012 and as against the said final order as per section 23 of the protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005 (act 43 of 2005), an appeal is to be preferred by the revision petitioners/respondents and in short, the present revision petition filed by them is not maintainable before this court. ..... 8.the specific argument advanced on behalf of the petitioners is that the learned judicial magistrate, valliyoor has recorded the sworn statement of the first respondent/wife and nowhere in the protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005, recording of sworn statement is permissible before passing an exparte order and in fact, the proceeding before the trial court under the protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005 is a civil in nature and therefore, a summary procedure is to be followed like that of the one followed under section 125 of cr.p.c. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... petitioner/husband, the learned judicial magistrate, aranthangi should have seen that c.m.p.no.9459 of 2010 (filed by the first respondent/wife under section 128 of the criminal procedure code) is not maintainable to execute the order of maintenance passed under section 12 of the protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005, as if the said order and claim in m.c.no.5 of 2009 has been passed under section 125 of the criminal procedure code.5. ..... before this court that to execute the order of maintenance passed under section 12 of the protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005, there is an enabling provision under section 20 (6) of the said act and further, no relief can be granted in the said petition which has not been filed under section 20 (6) of the act. ..... . be that as it may, in view of the fact that as per section 29 of the protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005, there is an effective and alternative remedy of filing of an appeal by the revision petitioner/husband as against the order dated 23/4/2012 in c.m.p.no.9459 of 2010 (m.c.no.5 of 2009) passed by the learned judicial magistrate, aranthangi, this court is of the considered view that the present revision petition filed by the revision ..... 752, wherein it is inter alia held that the writ petition cannot, hence be entertained as the petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy under section 28 of the protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005 to challenge the said order.28 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... a bare perusal of the order under challenge reveals that in passing the order under section 23 of the protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005, no prima facie satisfaction of the petitioner committing or having committed an offence of domestic violence or there being any likelihood of doing so has ..... petition, the respondent/wife filed m.p.no.727 of 2014 on the file of learned xvii metropolitan magistrate, saidapet, chennai, u/s.12 of protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005. ..... metropolitan magistrate, saidapet, chennai, shall take m.p.no.735 of 2014 in m.p.no.727 of 2014 on file afresh for consideration and dispose of the same after passing a reasoned order within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. ..... this revision challenges the order dated 14.10.2004 passed in c.a.no.85 of 2014 on the file of iii additional sessions court, ..... revision petition filed under section 397 r/w.401 of cr.p.c ..... against such order, the petitioners herein filed c.a.no.85 of 2014 on the file of learned iii additional sessions judge, chennai, which came to be dismissed under judgment ..... was allowed under orders dated 12.03.2014 ..... the records in c.a.no.85 of 2014 on the file of iii additional sessions court, chennai and set aside the order dated 14.10.2014.) 1. ..... the order of learned iii additional sessions court, chennai, passed in c.a.no.85 of 2014 on 14.10.2014 and that of learned xvii metropolitan magistrate, saidapet, chennai, passed in m.p.no.735 of 2014 on 12.03.2014 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
before the madurai bench of madras high court dated:10. 01/2013 coram the honourable mr.justice g.rajasuria c.r.p.(pd)(md)no.2516 of 2012 and m.p.(md)no.1 of 2012 r.saraswathi .. petitioner vs 1.p.sumithra devi 2.r.prabhu ganesh 3.r.pradeep 4.renganathan (r2 and r4 are given up as they are not necessary parties) .. respondents civil revision petition filed under article 227 of the constitution of india against the order passed by the learned judicial magistrate not i, tirunelveli, tirunelveli district in m.c.no.18 of 2010 vide his order dated 20.11.2012. #for petitioner ... mr.r.anand :order heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner who would implore and entreat by pointing out that he would be satisfied if liberty is given to the revision petitioner to approach the same magistrate under section 25(2) of the protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005, to get the impugned order varied and modified. 2.in view of the submission made, this revision is disposed of granting liberty to the revision petitioner to approach the magistrate. consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. no costs. km to the judicial magistrate not i, tirunelveli, tirunelveli district.
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent would vehemently contend that in the cases filed under protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005, the learned magistrate has power to pass interim and ex-parte orders and there is no provision available in the said act to set aside the order passed by the learned magistrate under section 23 of the act. ..... the brief facts of the case are as follows:- (i) the respondent as a complainant filed a petition in m.p.no.59 of 2012 under section 12 of the protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005, (hereinafter referred to as the act) seeking interim relief of residence order and monetary reliefs per month under section 23(3) of the act. ..... in the above circumstances, it is useful to extract section 23 of the protection of women from domestic violence act, 2005 which reads as follows:- "23. ..... further, on a perusal of the entire provision of the domestic violence act, it is seen that there is no provision available to set aside the interim order or ex-parte order passed under section 23 of the act. ..... hence, the order passed by the learned x metropolitan magistrate, egmore, chennai, under section 23(3) of the domestic violence act is perfectly valid and it is acceptable. ..... on a perusal of the entire papers, it is seen that m.p.no.59 of 2012 was filed by the respondent herein seeking for the interim relief of residence order and monetary reliefs per month under section 23(3) of the domestic violence act. .....
Tag this Judgment!