T.G.DINKAR Vs. STATE OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, who is the sole respondent in D.V.C.No.25 of 2012 on the file of the III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Chittoor, seeks for the quashment of the same. The 2nd respondent is his wife. The 3rd respondent is the son of the petitioner and the

(2.) ND respondent. The 2nd respondent laid case seeking for reliefs of protection under Section 18 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, (the D.V. Act, for short) and of monetary reliefs under Section 20 of the D.V. Act. The petitioner claimed that the very case is not maintainable on the ground that the same is barred by limitation and consequently seeks for the quashment of D.V.C.No.25 of 2012. Res Judicata: 2. The 2nd respondent and the petitioner were married to on 06 -8 -2006. The 3rd respondent was born on 18 -6 -2007. It is the case of the 2nd respondent that since the time of the birth of the child, the petitioner started harassing her for dowry and other financial benefits. The 2nd respondent filed D.V.C.No.15 of 2008 as well as M.C.No.31 of 2008 seeking for various reliefs under the provisions of the D.V. Act and under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the respondents 2 and 3 further submitted that after withdrawal of the cases, the respondents 2 and 3 went to Pune to join the petitioner as he was working at Pune as a Software Engineer at that time. He alleged that the petitioner refused to admit respondents 2 and 3 into the matrimonial home initially on the ground that the time was not auspicious. Allegedly, the petitioner later started demanding for additional dowry.