S. R. PERUMAL Vs. SUMITHRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for records relating to the complaint in D.V.M.C.No.2 of 2020 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Aundipatti and quash the same insofar as the petitioners are concerned.

(2.) The case of the petitioners/accused 2 and 3 is that they are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the 1st respondent who is their daugher-in-law who married their son/1st accused. According to the petitioners, there was difference of opinion between the 1st accused and the 1st respondent right from the date of marriage and the 1st respondent used to pick up frequent unnecessary quarrel with the petitioners and without informing them, she used to go to her parental home and the efforts taken by the petitioners to resolve the dispute went in vain and only in order to wreak vengence, the 1st respondent has lodged the present false complaint in D.V.M.C.No.2 of 2020 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Aundipatti.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioners would state that the petitioners are not liable to pay compensation or maintenance to the 1st respondent, as the 1st accused and 1st respondent lead their life in a separate home and therefore, the petitioners would not come under the share hold house under Section 2(s) of the Domestic Violence Act.