RADHA AMMAL AND ORS. Vs. SOUNDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioners to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 128 of 2009 on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Vaniyampadi. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Respondent side no representation.

(2.) On perusal of materials available on record it is reveal that the respondent's wife one Malarkodi sent a legal notice on 09.02.2009 to the petitioners herein, who are her mother, brothers and sisters, demanding a portion of family property. In turn, all the petitioners herein sent a reply notice to the respondent's wife on 07.03.2009 explaining the right of the parties in the reply notice. On perusal of the above said reply notice, the respondent herein and his wife sent a legal notice to the petitioners demanded Rs. 25,00,000/- for alleging that in the reply notice contained defamatory averments and then filed a private complaint under Section 193 and 500 I.P.C. before the Judicial Magistrate Court. Challenging the above said private complaint filed by the respondent, the petitioners filed this Criminal Original Petition to quash the above said proceedings.

(3.) The contention of the petitioners is that the wife of the respondent herein sent a legal notice to the petitioners with false contentions and therefore the petitioners given a detail reply explaining the rights of the parties in the reply notice. Further, the above said averments not amounts to any offence as contented by the petitioners and therefore the learned counsel pointed out that the private complaint filed by the respondent as if the petitioners have committed offences under Sections 193 and 500 IPC is not at all maintainable. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners further submitted that the wife of the respondent sent a legal notice, so as to deny the above said contentions the petitioners sent a detail reply only to the wife of the respondent about the rights of the parties. Further, the learned counsel pointed out that since no proceedings are pending before any Court, the complaint under Section 193 IPC not at all maintainable. The learned counsel further submitted that from the averments made in the complaint itself not attracted the provision of Section 500 IPC also and hence the complaint is not at all maintainable, since the averments in the reply notice are not defamatory as contended by the respondent and therefore prayed for quash the proceedings.