top of page

Petition under the Domestic Violence Act can be filed in a court where the “person aggrieved” perman

Shyamlal Devda and others vs Parimala., Criminal Appeal No. 141 of 2020 arising out of SLP (Crl) No. 4979 of 2019 – January 22, 2020

The bench comprising of the Justice R. Banumathi, the Justice. A.S. Bopanna regarding and the Justice Hrihikesh Roy partly allowed the appeal.

The facts of the case is that the respondent and one of the appellants named Manoj kumar got married as per Hindu rites at Rajasthan and led their matrimonial life in Chennai. The respondent thereafter decided to reside with her parents and refused to join her matrimonial home and claimed protection under the Domestic Violence Act, before the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore against her husband , her in- laws and the other relatives of her husband.

The issues framed here is, Whether the relatives of the appellant are held liable for monetary relief ? Whether the Metropolitan Magistrate court has jurisdiction to entertain the complaint filed by the respondent ?

The contention of the appellant is that neither the marriage being solemnized  nor the matrimonial house was at Bangalore. Therefore the Magistrate court has no jurisdiction to entertain the petition filed by the respondent and the vague allegations have been made against the appellants.

The contention of the respondent side is that the court has jurisdiction as per section 27 of the Domestic Violence Act and has submitted that the gift given to the respondent by her father been taken away by the appellants.

The court held that, The petition under the Domestic Violence Act can be filed in a court where the “person aggrieved” permanently or temporarily resides or carries on business or is employed. The relatives except in laws and the husband of the respondent cannot be held responsible for the award of monetary relief as there is no specific allegation regarding the violence caused by them against the respondent. So, the criminal case against them is said to be quashed.

While coming to the second issue, the bench observed that under section 27 of the protection of women from the Domestic Violence, 2005 the respondent is residing with her parents in the territorial limits of the Metropolitan Magistrate Court. Therefore the court has the jurisdiction to entertain the complaint filed by the respondent.

The appeal is partly allowed by quashing the criminal proceedings against the relatives of the husband and the court directs the Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore to proceed with the case filed by the respondent against her husband and in- laws.

View/ Download the Judgments: Shyamlal Devda and others vs Parimala

–   Prithisha S



bottom of page