M MURUGANANDAM Vs. M MEGALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition challenges the action of the Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Sivagangai in taking on file a Complaint filed under Sections 18 and 19 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

(2.) I have heard Veera Kathiravan, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners and N. Tamilmani, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent.

(3.) The First Petitioner herein married the Respondent herein according to Hindu Customary Rights on 27.3.1986. Out of the said wedlock, a girl and two boys were born. According to the First Petitioner, the marriage between him and the Respondent was dissolved in accordance with the customary practices of the community to which he belongs and that thereafter he married the Second Petitioner herein. The First Petitioner also claims that there was a compromise between him and the Respondent under a Deed of Muchalika dated 19.11.2006, followed by a Memorandum of Understanding dated 14.6.2007. Since the validity of the customary divorce alleged by the First Petitioner and the details with regard to the alleged compromise between him and the Respondent are not necessary for a decision in this Revision Petition, I am not adverting to the same in great detail.