Santhanalakshmi vs Alangaram
2022 Latest Caselaw 17994 Mad

                                                                                 CRP(MD)No.180 of 2022

                          BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                DATED : 02.12.2022

                                                      CORAM

                                   THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI

                                             C.R.P(MD)No.180 of 2022
                                           and C.M.P(MD)No.976 of 2022

                     Santhanalakshmi               .... Petitioner/Appellant/Petitioner/Petitioner

                                                          Vs.

                     1.Alangaram
                     2.Murugan                     ...Respondents 1 & 2/Respondents 1 &2/
                                                      Respondents 1 & 2/Respondents 1 & 2
                     3.Manickadevi                 ... 3rd Respondent/3rd respondent/
                                                       3rd Respondent/Proposed party

                     Prayer:- Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of
                     India to call for the records in respect of the order passed in Crl.A.No.4 of
                     2019 on the file of the Additional District Court, Virudhunagar concurring
                     the order passed in Cr.M.P.No.1245 of 2017 in Crl.M.P.No.908 of 2009 on
                     the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Virudhunagar and set aside the
                     same.
                                         For Petitioner         : Mrs.P.Malini




                     _________
                     Page 1 of 6



https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                   CRP(MD)No.180 of 2022

                                                          ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition is filed as against the order passed by

the Additional District Court, Virudhunagar in Cr.A.No. 4 of 2019 dated

13.08.2021 concurring the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2,

Virudhunagar in Cr.M.P.No.1245 of 2017 in Cr.M.P.No.908 of 2009 dated

17.09.2018.

2. The petitioner has filed an application under Sections 12,18,19,

20 and 22 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005

against the respondents 1 and 2. Pending the application, she has also filed

the above Cr.M.P.No.1245 of 2017 under Order 1 Rule 10(2) of C.P.C to

implead one Manika Devi, the alleged second wife of the first respondent.

3. The trial court has declined to grant the relief as sought for by

this petitioner. While dismissing the application, the trial court has observed

that Civil Procedure Code is not at all maintainable in the D.V.C

proceedings. However, the trial court went to the extent of discussing the

merits of the case and observed that the relief sought for under Sections 18,

_________

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP(MD)No.180 of 2022

19, 20 and 22 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act,

2005, is only against the respondents 1 and 2 and no case is made against

the proposed 3rd respondent.

4. Challenging the same, the petitioner has filed Crl.A.No.4 of

2019 before the Additional District Court, Virudhunagar. The First

Appellate Court has observed that there is no domestic relationship between

the petitioner and the proposed 3rd respondent as required under the

abovesaid Act and dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved over the same, the

present Civil Revision Petition is filed.

5. This Court heard the submissions made by the learned counsel

for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record.

6. In view of the judgment of the Full Bench in Arun Daniel and

others vs. Suganya [2022 SCC OnLine Mad 5435], the application filed

under Order 1 Rule 10 C.P.C to implead anybody as party to the proceedings

is maintainable. However, considering the averments made as against the

_________

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP(MD)No.180 of 2022

proposed 3rd respondent, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the

orders of the courts below. The proceedings proceeded under Protection of

Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, is only an enquiry and not a

trial and therefore, the presence of the party is not at all required if they are

represented through a counsel as held by the Hon'ble Full Bench in Arun

Daniel and others vs. Suganya [2022 SCC OnLine Mad 5435].

7. Initially, D.V.C proceedings was filed in the year 2009 and the

same is pending for more than 10 years and therefore, this Court is inclined

to direct the trial court to conclude the proceedings as expeditiously as

possible, preferably, within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of

a copy of this order.

8. In fine, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. No costs.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

02.12.2022 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No CM

_________

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP(MD)No.180 of 2022

To,

1. The Additional District Court, Virudhunagar

2. The Judicial Magistrate No.II, Virudhunagar

3. The Section Officer, V.R. Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

_________

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP(MD)No.180 of 2022

B.PUGALENDHI, J.

CM

C.R.P(MD)No.180 of 2022 and C.M.P(MD)No.976 of 2022

02.12.2022

_________

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis