Domestic Violence

Interim order passed by judges under the DV act

In one case the house belonged to the Wife and her mother in law jointly. The house was on loan and EMI was being paid by the husband. The wife demanded right to residence or rent and also claimed maintanance. The court has order rent of 10000/- for the wife and 5000/- as maintanance for the child. But the best part is that the earning wife has been ordered to pay 50% of the EMI along with baklog to the husband by the wife. So this is a great arrangment wherein the wife gets only 3000/- as net maintanance.

In another case the Wife claimed for 60000/- maintance and also right to residence. The judge ordered both the couples to live together in a seperate flat of the husband and ordered the husband to bear all the house hold expenses and ordered 2500/- other expenese for both the wife and the child.

From the above two interim orders under the DV act it can be seen that the judges are trying to do justice in their own way. If the act is too onesided then even the judges know how to play with the law and at the same time deliver justice.

In both the above cases the hungry wives dint get any great monitory benefit but were given hidden reliefs.

Following are some of the DV judgments:

• Wife has no right to stay in Parents in law's House



• Second wife entitled to maintanance? DV ACT makes it!!



• Prove home violence for relief: court



• Prove home violence for relief: court



• Your house caould be broke open with a Exparte DV order!!!



• DV can filed for acts even before the Act came into force HC



• Domestic violence Act: No retrospective effect(dv put to grab flat)



• batra - batra_SC



• Chennai_HC



• Chennai_hc_1_against



• CJ_caution _against_misuse_of_FV_Act



• DV_examined_by_SC



• DV_Judgment_AP_HC_Retrospective_Operation



• dv-act-court-to-funish-order-copies-at-the-time-of-reading-out-the-order



• FAQonProtectionOfWomen1



• FAQonProtectionOfWomen2



• how-not-to-file-an-quash-in-a-dv-case-or-how-to-screw-up-your-own-quash



• JoshiVsJoshi BomHC (Bahu has no right over saas' property)



• kapil-vs-urvashi



• No_retrospective



• no-quash-if-magistrate-handling-dv-case-erred-in-procedure



• no-use-in-filing-rcreven-wife-refusing-to-join-hubby-gets-relief-under-dv-act



• no-use-in-tranfering-house-to-your-mumdv-act-will-apply-re-shared-household



• shaleen-kabra-vs-shivani-kabra-dv-act-2008



• swarup-sarkar-dv-act-judgment-2007



• the-dv-act-may-be-applied-retrospectively



• Magistrate has to ensure that copy of the order is made available same day—HIGH Court of Kerala



• There is no bar for the aggrieved person to seek the other part of the reliefs under the Act before a Civil Court or a Family Court or a Crimin



• Sale deed must be registered to relinquish all the claim on property



• Procedure in DV act



• Quash failed



• Quash failed(procedure)



• Crpc in family court. Husband sought transfer of DV from magistrate court to family court (Dismissed)



• Magistrate should not insist on the personal presence of the petitioner



• Fraud played by petitioner by giving wrong addresss of the respondent. Still not quashed



• Family Court or Civil Court to deal with an application under Section 12



• Wife sought transfer of from the fire of the II Additional Family Court, Chennai to the file of the Sub-Court, Chengalpattu. REJECTED.



• Wife sought transfer from Chennai to vellor. Rejected



• HC: Don’t come directly to us. contentions must be raised before the Appellate/Sessions Court in a properly instituted appeal under Section 29



• HC: Don’t approach us saying all allegations are false. If false then tell magistrate



• HC: The petitioners must appear before the learned Magistrate and raise all their contentions. Don’t come to us for quash



• First go to session court under section 29



• AP HC: Women cannot be made respondent



• Interesting property judgment (DV Act)



• Intresting case



• Females cannot be made respondent. Even though provision of appeal is there is section 29 but sometime for immediate relief Section 482 of the



• DV can be filed in the family court under section 8, 19, 20, 21 and 22 of the Act, 2005 but not under section 12



• Shared house hold examined by HC



• proceedings cannot be quashed for the only alleged reason that the allegations raised in the present complaint are inconsistent with the averme



• Magistrate should be careful in passing orders.



• 482 cannot be invoked because of procedure violations



• Raise all objection before appellate court, before coming to us : HC



• DV victim can stay in the first floor room



• DV and all cases settled in the transfer petition in SC



• IN DV personal presence of KIDS not must to decide application.



• HC: daughterinlaw cannot enter fatherinlaw’s house if the relationship between husband wife is strained



• Since no relief is claimed against petitioners 2 to 11, it is unnecessary to continue the proceedings against them and continuation of the proc



• A DV case involving properties



• HC wrongly transferred case from one state to another.



• Procedural violation in DV: View of HC



• In both cases of final and interim order session court is the court of appeal



• minor procedural deviation being technical in nature, need not be taken serious note off and on that ground, the proceedings pending under the



• After 20 yrs wife appeared and claiming DV relief



• A woman has her rights of maintenance against her husband or sons/daughters. She can assert her rights, if any, against the property of her hus



• DV judgment : HC



• Bitter fight of couple ended by HC



• HC direction for speedy disposal in DV case



• Another case of HC direction for speedy disposal in DV case



• Appointment of protection officer must



• Argument needs to be carried out before Magistrate

www.498a.org.in                                                                                              Back to Citations Main Page