CRP/6268/2026 of S.J. Vasantha Kumar Vs R. Thamizharasi on 5 October 2026

ORDER

This civil revision petition has been filed under Article 227 of The Constitution of India seeking to quash the proceedings in DVC. No.2 of 2026 on the file of the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate Court, Pallipat, Tiruvallur District.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. This Court has carefully considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record.

4. The first respondent initiated proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act against the petitioner and the second respondent and sought for various reliefs. The petitioner is the father in law of the first respondent. The second respondent is none other than the husband of the first respondent. They were added as party respondents in the petition under the Domestic Violence Act.

5. According to the petitioner, the first respondent added him as a party to the petition under the Domestic Violence Act only to harass him and the proceedings initiated by the first respondent is an abuse of process of law. Hence, the petitioner has sought for striking off the proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act insofar as the petitioner is concerned.

6. The issue raised in the present petition is squarely covered by the judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in Arul Daniel & others Vs. Suganya & others [reported in 2022 (6) CTC 833]. The grievance expressed by the petitioner can be worked out in line with the guidelines issued in paragraph No.76(ix) of the aforesaid judgment and for proper appreciation, the same is extracted hereunder: “76 (ix) In Kunapareddy (cited supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court upheld the Order of a Magistrate purportedly exercising powers under Order 6, Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as “C.P.C.”), to permit the amendment of an Application under Section 12 of the D.V. Act. Taking a cue therefrom, it would be open to any of the Respondent(s), at any stage of the proceeding, to apply to the Magistrate to have their names deleted from the array of Respondents if they have been improperly joined as parties. For this purpose, the Magistrate can draw sustenance from the power under Order 1, Rule 10(2) of the C.P.C. A judicious use of this power would ensure that the proceedings under the D.V.Act do not generate into a weapon of harassment and would prevent the process of Court from being abused by joining all and sundry as parties to the lis.”

7. The Full Bench of this Court made it very clear that an order under Article 227 of the Constitution of India striking off the proceedings will be passed only in cases where the Magistrate suffers from patent lack of jurisdiction. That is not the case here and the grievance expressed by the petitioner can be dealt with by the Court, before which, the proceedings under the Domestic Violence Act are pending.

8. In the light of the above discussions, the above civil revision petition is disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner to move an appropriate application before the District Munsif-cum- Judicial Magistrate Court, Pallipat, Tiruvallur District seeking to delete his name from the array of respondents and the same shall be dealt with on its own merits and in accordance with law after affording sufficient opportunity to both parties. If such an application is filed, it is left open to the first respondent to file a counter. The petitioner shall be permitted to be represented through counsel and his presence is dispensed with. Consequently, the connected CMPs are closed. 05-10-2026 To The District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate Court, Pallipat, Tiruvallur District. RS

N.ANAND VENKATESH,J RS CRP.No.6268 of 2026 & CMP.Nos.27048 & 27050 of 2026 05-10-2026