IN THE COURT OF THE LD. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE (MAHILA COURT), SOUTH-WEST DISTRICT, SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
D.V. CASE NO. DV case number OF Year of the DV case
IN THE MATTER OF: -
Complainant's name: COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
N.D.O.H.: Next date of hearing
REPLY ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS NO. 2, 3 & 4 TO THE COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF THE PROTECTION OF WOMEN FROM DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT, 2005 FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH: -
PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS: -
1.That the complainant is not entitled to the reliefs claimed in the complaint, as the complainant is guilty of desertion and is residing at her parental house of her own free will.
2.That the complainant is herself guilty of misconduct, matrimonial offences and acts of cruelty which she has committed, and continues to commit, at the instance of her parents, as part of a series of such acts. The complainant is a working lady and earns a handsome income.
3.There is, therefore, neither any 'domestic relationship' nor any 'shared household' within the meaning of Sections 2(f) and 2(s) of the DV Act. Hence, the complainant could not have maintained the present complaint under the DV Act against the answering Respondents no. 2, 3 and 4 (hereinafter referred to as the "respondents").
4.That the DV Act has been enacted for the purpose of providing monetary assistance to a mother who is incapable of supporting herself despite sincere efforts made by her. A spouse who is well qualified to obtain employment immediately and with little effort cannot be expected to remain idle in order to squeeze out and milk out the other spouse by relieving him or her of his or her purse by way of a cut in the nature of pendant lite alimony.
5.The complainant is not entitled to the relief of a compensation order under Section 22. Hence, the same is liable to be rejected. The complainant is making huge financial claims in the guise of dowry and is resorting to every kind of activity to humiliate and to implicate the answering respondents and their family members in one matter or another. Neither did the respondents commit any domestic violence, nor are the respondents in any domestic relationship with the complainant. Hence, the reliefs sought in this complaint are not maintainable and the same are liable to be rejected.
REPLY ON MERITS: -
1-2. That the contents of paragraphs 1 to 2 of the complaint are denied. It is denied that the complainant is extremely apprehensive of domestic violence being committed by the respondents and of the consequences thereof upon her life and liberty. Hence, the reliefs sought under these paragraphs are not maintainable and the same are liable to be rejected.
3.That the contents of paragraph 3 (i–vii) of the complaint are denied. Hence, the reliefs sought under these paragraphs are not maintainable and the same are liable to be rejected.
4.That the contents of paragraph 4 of the complaint are denied to the extent that the respondents did not mend their ways and that on Date of alleged beating incident the respondents once again brutally beat the complainant and snatched the minor child from her. Hence, the relief sought under this paragraph is not maintainable and the same is liable to be rejected.
Since no incident has taken place, and neither the facts nor the circumstances leading to the filing of the complaint have been shown or mentioned, no specific reply can be given in the absence of the same. However, the complainant is not entitled to any of the reliefs claimed in the answering paragraphs by invoking any of the provisions of the Act, whether under Sections 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 or 23 of the Act.
In the prayer clause, along with its sub-paragraphs, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to dismiss the present complaint with exemplary costs. The complainant is not entitled to any of the reliefs claimed.
It is respectfully submitted that the present complaint is absolutely false, frivolous, baseless, misconceived and vexatious, to the knowledge of the complainant herself, besides being unsustainable in law, and is therefore liable to be dismissed with compensatory costs. The affidavit of the complainant in support of the present application under the DV Act is also wrong and is denied in totality.
P R A Y E R
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that the complaint of the complainant, being false, frivolous and not maintainable in law and on merits, may kindly be dismissed.
Pass such other and further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
DELHIRESPONDENTS NO. 2, 3 & 4
THROUGH
DATED: -
Date of reply
ADVOCATE
Advocate's name and address,
Advocate's locality and PIN code
VERIFICATION: -
I, the above-named respondents, do hereby verify at Delhi on this Day of verification of reply day of Month and year of verification of reply that the contents of paragraphs 1 to 4 and their sub-paragraphs of the reply on merits are true and correct to my knowledge, and that the contents of paragraphs 1 to Number of last preliminary objections paragraph of the preliminary objections to the reply are true and correct on information received and believed to be true. The last paragraph is the prayer clause before this Hon'ble Court.
RESPONDENTS NO. 2, 3 & 4
IN THE COURT OF THE LD. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE (MAHILA COURT), SOUTH-WEST DISTRICT, SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
D.V. CASE NO. DV case number OF Year of the DV case
IN THE MATTER OF: -
Complainant's name: COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Sh. Respondent no. 2's name S/o Late Respondent no. 2's father's name, aged about Respondent no. 2's age years, R/o Respondent no. 2's address, presently at New Delhi, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under: -
1.That I am the respondent no. 2 in the above-noted matter and am well conversant with the facts of the case, and as such I am competent to swear this affidavit.
2.That the submissions as to facts made in the accompanying reply to the complaint under Section 12 of the DV Act have been drafted by my counsel as per my instructions, and the same have been read over and explained to me in my vernacular language. The same may be read as part and parcel of this affidavit and are not reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION: -
Verified at Delhi on this Day of verification of affidavit day of Month and year of verification of affidavit that the contents of my above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, that no part thereof is false and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF THE LD. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE (MAHILA COURT), SOUTH-WEST DISTRICT, SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
D.V. CASE NO. DV case number OF Year of the DV case
IN THE MATTER OF: -
Complainant's name: COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Smt. Respondent no. 3's name W/o Sh. Respondent no. 3's husband's name, aged about Respondent no. 3's age years, R/o Respondent no. 3's address, presently at New Delhi, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under: -
1.That I am the respondent no. 3 in the above-noted matter and am well conversant with the facts of the case, and as such I am competent to swear this affidavit.
2.That the submissions as to facts made in the accompanying reply to the complaint under Section 12 of the DV Act have been drafted by my counsel as per my instructions, and the same have been read over and explained to me in my vernacular language. The same may be read as part and parcel of this affidavit and are not reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION: -
Verified at Delhi on this Day of verification of affidavit day of Month and year of verification of affidavit that the contents of my above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, that no part thereof is false and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF THE LD. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE (MAHILA COURT), SOUTH-WEST DISTRICT, SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
D.V. CASE NO. DV case number OF Year of the DV case
IN THE MATTER OF: -
Complainant's name: COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mr. Respondent no. 4's name, S/o Respondent no. 4's father's name, aged about Respondent no. 4's age years, resident of Respondent no. 4's address, presently at New Delhi, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under: -
1.That I am respondent no. 4 in the above-noted matter and am fully conversant with the facts of the case, and as such I am competent to swear this affidavit.
2.That the submissions on facts made in the accompanying reply to the Complaint under Section 12 of the DV Act were drafted by my counsel as per my instructions, and the same have been read over and explained to me in my vernacular language. The said reply may be read as part and parcel of this affidavit, and its contents are not reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Delhi on this Day of verification of affidavit day of Year of verification of affidavit that the contents of my above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, that no part thereof is false, and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF THE LD. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE (MAHILA COURT), SOUTH-WEST DISTRICT, SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
D.V. CASE NO. DV case number OF 2021
IN THE MATTER OF: -
Complainant's name: COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
N.D.O.H.: Next date of hearing
REPLY ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS NO. 2, 3 & 4 TO THE APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 23 OF THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT FOR AD-INTERIM ORDERS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH :-
PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS :-
1.That the complainant is herself guilty of misconduct, matrimonial offences and cruelties which she has committed, and continues to commit, at the instance of her parents and as part of a series of such acts. The complainant is a working lady and earns handsomely.
2.That the complainant has levelled stereotypical allegations in the captioned complaint. Needless to say, the complainant has humiliated the answering respondents and made them scapegoats of alleged atrocities and cruelties, as she has done earlier. It appears that the complainant is not only ill-advised but is also adamant in fulfilling her own desires by perpetrating the highest degree of atrocities and cruelties, and is determined to break the marriage for her own reasons.
3.That the present complaint is misconceived, mala fide and not maintainable in law, because the complainant has intentionally and deliberately concealed material facts from this Hon'ble Court with regard to her source of income. In view of the above submissions, the complainant is not entitled to any maintenance, as she has a sufficient source of income of her own. The present complaint is therefore liable to be dismissed being meritless.
4.That the present complaint is not maintainable or sustainable in the eyes of law, as the complainant is attempting to take advantage of her own wrongs.
5.That it is pertinent to mention herein that the respondents have lost all their savings owing to these multiple litigations.
6.That the complaint as framed is not maintainable under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The complainant has not set out any facts leading to the filing of the present complaint. In the absence of any documents or reasons for seeking the reliefs from this Hon'ble Court, the complaint is incomplete and discloses no cause of action. Since the answering respondents have not been provided with the facts leading to the filing of the present complaint, it is liable to be dismissed summarily. The answering respondents reserve their right to file an additional reply as and when the complainant sets out the background, facts and circumstances by virtue of which the present complaint has been filed by invoking the provisions of the Act.
7.That none of the requirements in respect of which prayers have been made in the prayer clause, for restraining the respondents from the subject property, are satisfied. The occasion for filing the present application arises from the circumstances mentioned in the paragraphs of the complaint, which may be read as part and parcel of this paragraph and whose contents are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity. The complainant has been living in her own house, leading a peaceful and luxurious life. This shows that the present DV application is an afterthought and baseless, and is hence liable to be dismissed outright.
8.There is thus neither a 'domestic relationship' nor any 'shared household' as defined in Sections 2(f) and 2(s) of the DV Act. Hence, the complainant could not have maintained the present complaint under the DV Act against the respondents.
9.That the DV Act has been enacted for the purpose of providing monetary assistance to a spouse who is incapable of supporting himself or herself despite sincere efforts made by him or her. A spouse who is well qualified to obtain employment immediately with little effort is not expected to remain idle in order to squeeze out, or milk out, the other spouse by relieving him or her of his or her own purse through a cut in the nature of pendente lite alimony.
10.It is stated that, as per Sections 2(f) and 2(s) of the DV Act, since the complainant and respondent no. 1 are not staying together and have not stayed together as husband and wife in the same household, the allegations made against the household would not amount to domestic violence in the absence of a domestic relationship and a shared household as defined under the DV Act. In Harbans Lal Malik & Ors. v. Payal Malik, 2010 (3) LRC 177 (DEL), the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, while dealing with the definition of "domestic relationship", held as under:
"12. It is apparent that domestic relationship arises between two persons who have lived together in a shared household and who are related by consanguinity, marriage or through a relationship in the nature of marriage, adoption, or are family members living together as a joint family. The definition speaks of living together at any point of time; however, it does not speak of having a relation at any point of time. Thus, if the domestic relationship continues and the parties have lived together at any point of time in a shared household, the person can be a respondent; but if the relationship does not continue and the relationship was in the past and is not in the present, a person cannot be made a respondent on the ground of a past relationship.
11.It is stated that in Vijay Verma v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2010 (3) LRC 291 (DEL), the Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that only the violence committed by a person while living in the shared household can constitute domestic violence for the purpose of the DV Act. Paragraphs 6 and 7 of the judgment, which are material for the present purpose, are extracted hereunder:
"6. A perusal of this provision makes it clear that a domestic relationship arises in respect of an aggrieved person if the aggrieved person has lived together with the respondent in a shared household. This living together can be either soon before the filing of the petition or 'at any point of time'. The problem arises with the meaning of the phrase "at any point of time". Does that mean that living together at any stage in the past would give a person the right to become an aggrieved person and claim a domestic relationship? I consider that "at any point of time" under the Act only means a situation where an aggrieved person has been continuously living in the shared household as a matter of right but, for some reason, the aggrieved person has to leave the house temporarily, and when she returns, she is not allowed to enjoy her right to live in the property. However, "at any point of time" cannot be defined as "at any point of time in the past" whether the right to live survives or not. A domestic relationship continues so long as the parties live under the same roof and enjoy living together in a shared household. However, where the living together has been given up, Ellipsis in quoted judgment the domestic relationship comes to an end
“7.For that, the purpose of the Act is to provide a remedy to aggrieved persons against domestic violence. Domestic violence can take place only where the aggrieved person is living in a shared household with the respondents. Ellipsis in quoted judgment Only violence committed by a person while living in the shared household can constitute domestic violence. Ellipsis in quoted judgment Domestic violence is violence which is committed when the parties are in a domestic relationship, sharing the same household and the household goods, with an opportunity to commit such violence."
12.The complainant is not entitled to the relief of a maintenance order; hence, the same is liable to be rejected. The complainant is making exorbitant financial claims in the nature of dowry and is resorting to every kind of conduct to humiliate and to implicate the answering respondents and their family members in one matter or another. Neither have the answering respondents committed any act of domestic violence, nor are the respondents in a domestic relationship with the complainant. Hence, the reliefs sought in this complaint are not maintainable and the same are liable to be rejected.
REPLY ON MERITS :-
1.That the contents of paragraph 1 of the application are a matter of record and need no reply.
2-3. That the contents of paragraphs 2 to 3 of the application are wrong and denied. It is denied that the applicant has been subjected to utmost physical and mental cruelty by the respondents and has been thrown out of the matrimonial home along with her three-year-old minor son. It is further denied that the respondents have declined to maintain the applicant and her minor son despite the fact that the applicant has no other alternative source of income.
4.That the contents of paragraph 4 of the application are wrong and denied. It is denied that the respondents have ample resources to pay for the maintenance of the applicant and her minor son but have intentionally neglected to maintain them.
5-6. That the contents of paragraphs 5 to 6 of the application are wrong and denied. It is denied that the entire istridhan, gold and silver jewellery, clothes and documents of the applicant are in the possession of the respondents and that they have refused to return the same to the applicant.
7.That the contents of paragraph 7 of the application are wrong and denied. It is denied that the applicant has always been treated with utmost physical, mental, emotional and economic cruelty, that she has been deprived of basic necessities including residence, and that she has been neglected by the respondents.
8.That the contents of paragraph 8 of the application are wrong and denied. It is denied that the applicant's in-laws are enjoying four air conditioners and that there are thirteen air conditioners in the entire building. It is further denied that two four-wheelers are being enjoyed by the in-laws of the applicant, i.e., the entire family of the respondents of Respondents' family name or locality is having six cars including the above. It is further denied that the applicant's in-laws own various businesses and properties, namely: ancestral property at Address of ancestral property (rented out); three shops at Address of three shops (rented out); a running shop at Address of running shop; a running construction sale and purchase business at Address of construction business in the name of Name under which construction business runs; a running sweet shop at Address of sweet shop in the name of Name under which sweet shop runs; farming land at Location of farming land; land in the native village at Location of land in native village; and a running business in the name of "Business name" at Green Field, Address of business at Green Field, apart from various cars and two-wheelers etc. It is further denied that, in totality, the family business income of the respondents is not less than Rs.Family business income per month (₹) per month, out of which the applicant's husband must be earning not less than Rs.Husband's individual income per month (₹) per month individually.
9.That the contents of paragraph 9 of the application are wrong and denied. It is denied that the applicant belongs to the middle class and that she has claimed a sum of Rs.Monthly maintenance claimed (₹) as monthly maintenance, including household expenses, the child's school fees, etc. It is further denied that the applicant has claimed a residence order or, in the alternative, rent of Rs.Monthly rent claimed (₹)/- per month, and that she has further claimed Rs.Compensation claimed (₹) as compensation for the domestic violence alleged to have been committed against her. It is further denied that the respondent ought to be restrained from alienating his properties/shop, etc., as detailed in the petition, and his interest in the joint family properties, and further restrained from parting with or alienating any articles, istridhan, jewellery or documents of the applicant. It is further denied that the respondents ought to be restrained from committing any act of domestic violence against the applicant in any form.
10.That the contents of paragraph 10 of the application are wrong and denied.
The prayer clause, along with its sub-paragraphs, and in the light of the foregoing, may be considered, and this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to dismiss the present application with exemplary costs. The complainant is not entitled to any of the reliefs claimed.
It is respectfully submitted that the present application is absolutely false, frivolous, baseless, misconceived and vexatious, even to the knowledge of the complainant herself, besides being unsustainable in law, and is therefore liable to be dismissed with compensatory costs.
P R A Y E R
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that the application of the complainant, being false, frivolous and not maintainable in law and on merits, may kindly be dismissed.
Pass such other and further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
DELHIRESPONDENTS NO. 2, 3 & 4
THROUGH
DATED :-
Date of reply
ADVOCATE
Advocate's name and address,
New Delhi-PIN code of the advocate's office.
IN THE COURT OF LD. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE (MAHILA COURT), SOUTH-WEST DISTRICT, SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI.
D.V. CASE NO. DV case number OF 2021.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Complainant's name: COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Sh. Deponent's name S/o Sh. Deponent's father's name, aged about Deponent's age years, R/o House No. Deponent's house number, presently at New Delhi, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under: -
1.That I am respondent No. 2 in the above-noted matter and am well conversant with the facts of the case, and as such I am competent to swear this affidavit.
2.That the submissions as to facts made in the accompanying reply to the application for interim relief have been drafted by my counsel as per my instructions; the same have been read over and explained to me in my vernacular language, and the same may be read as part and parcel of this affidavit, and are not reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Delhi on this Day of verification of affidavit day of Month and year of verification of affidavit that the contents of my above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, that no part thereof is false, and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF LD. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE (MAHILA COURT), SOUTH-WEST DISTRICT, SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI.
D.V. CASE NO. DV case number OF 2021.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Complainant's name: COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Smt. Deponent's name W/o Sh. Deponent's husband's name, aged about Deponent's age years, R/o Deponent's address, presently at New Delhi, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under: -
1.That I am respondent No. 3 in the above-noted matter and am well conversant with the facts of the case, and as such I am competent to swear this affidavit.
2.That the submissions as to facts made in the accompanying reply to the application for interim relief have been drafted by my counsel as per my instructions; the same have been read over and explained to me in my vernacular language, and the same may be read as part and parcel of this affidavit, and are not reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
DEPONENT
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Delhi on this Day of verification of affidavit day of May, 2022 that the contents of my above affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, that no part of it is false, and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF THE LD. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE (MAHILA COURT), SOUTH-WEST DISTRICT, SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
D.V. CASE NO. DV case number OF 2021
IN THE MATTER OF: -
Complainant's name: COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mr. Deponent's name, S/o Sh. Deponent's father's name, aged about Deponent's age years, residing at Deponent's address, presently at New Delhi, who solemnly affirms and declares as under: -
1.That I am respondent no. 4 in the above-noted matter and am well conversant with the facts of the case, and as such I am competent to swear this affidavit.
2.That the submissions on facts made in the accompanying reply to the application for interim relief have been drafted by my counsel as per my instructions, and the same have been read over and explained to me in my vernacular language. The said reply may be read as part and parcel of this affidavit and, for the sake of brevity, its contents are not reproduced herein.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Delhi on this Day of verification of affidavit day of May, 2022 that the contents of my above affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, that no part of it is false, and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF THE LD. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE (MAHILA COURT), SOUTH-WEST DISTRICT, SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
D.V. CASE NO. DV case number OF 2021
IN THE MATTER OF: -
Complainant's name: COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
N.D.O.H.: Next date of hearing
REPLY ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT NO. Respondent number of mother-in-law (MOTHER-IN-LAW) TO THE DETAILED COMPLAINT OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE INCIDENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH :-
PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS :-
1.That the complainant is not entitled to the relief claimed in the complaint, as she is guilty of desertion and is residing at her parental house of her own choice.
2.That the complainant is herself guilty of misconduct, matrimonial offences and cruelties which she has committed, and continues to commit, at the instigation of her parents and as part of a series of acts. The complainant is a working lady and earns a handsome income.
3.That the complainant has levelled stereotyped allegations in the captioned complaint. Needless to say, the complainant has humiliated the answering respondents and other family members and made them scapegoats of atrocities and cruelties, as she has done earlier. It appears that the complainant is not only ill-advised but is also adamant in fulfilling her own desires by committing the highest degree of atrocities and cruelties, and is determined to break the marriage for her own reasons.
4.That the present complaint is misconceived, mala fide and not maintainable in law, because the complainant has intentionally and deliberately concealed material facts from this Hon’ble Court with regard to her source of income. In view of the aforesaid submissions, the complainant is not entitled to any maintenance, as she has sufficient income of her own. The present complaint is, therefore, liable to be dismissed being devoid of merit.
5.That the entire complaint of the complainant rests upon a manipulated, fabricated and concocted story, and the same is a sheer abuse and misuse of the process of law.
6.That the present complaint is not maintainable and sustainable in the eyes of law, as the complainant is seeking to take advantage of her own wrongs.
7.That it is pertinent to mention herein that the respondents have lost all their savings on account of these multiple litigations.
8.That it is further pertinent to mention here that the wife of respondent no. 1 has made a false and concocted story to implicate the respondents, and has also filed a false complaint against them.
9.It is further submitted that the present complaint is an offshoot of the CAW complaint as well as the complaint for domestic violence filed by the complainant. It is most humbly submitted that the complainant voluntarily left the premises of the respondents after taking away all the valuables, including jewellery.
10.That it is submitted that the respondents never subjected the complainant to any cruelty or ill-treatment during her stay at the matrimonial home. It is further submitted that the complainant was given due care and affection by the respondents. It is further submitted that the complainant was provided medical care and a proper, nourishing diet, and during her stay with the respondents all medical expenses were borne by them. The complainant was initially taken to the hospital for check-ups, and thereafter she was regularly taken to the nursing home, where she was given appropriate treatment as per the doctor’s advice, and all these expenses were borne by the respondents.
11.That from the very beginning the complainant had strained relations with respondent no. 1 and the answering respondents, and after a short span of time she started confronting and arguing with the respondents and constantly objected to their acts and views.
12.That the complaint as framed is not maintainable under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The complainant has not set out any facts leading to the filing of the present complaint. In the absence of any documents or reasons for seeking relief from this Hon’ble Court, the complaint is incomplete and discloses no cause of action. Since the answering respondent has not been provided with the facts leading to the filing of the present complaint, the complaint is liable to be dismissed summarily. The answering respondent reserves the right to file an additional reply as and when the complainant discloses the background, facts and circumstances by virtue of which the present complaint has been filed by invoking the provisions of the Act.
13.Save and except what is specifically admitted, each and every statement or averment made by the complainant touching upon, or seeking to touch upon, the scope of the controversy between the rival contesting parties, in so far as it controverts or seeks to controvert any statement or averment made by the answering respondents herein, is wrong, controverted and denied.
14.None of the requirements in respect of which prayers have been made in the prayer clause, for restraining the respondents from the subject property, are made out. The occasion for filing the present application arises from the circumstances mentioned in the paragraphs of the complaint, which may be read as part and parcel of this paragraph and whose contents are not repeated herein for the sake of brevity. The complainant has been living in her own house, leading a peaceful and luxurious life. This shows that the present DV application is an afterthought and baseless, and is hence liable to be dismissed outright.
15.At the very threshold, it is stated that the entire complaint is an afterthought of mendacious lies, concocted events and fabricated incidents. Therefore, the very act of filing the present complaint by the complainant is an act of rank dishonesty and a brazen abuse of the process of law, and it deserves to be dismissed at the very threshold, but in light of the averments made hereinabove and further in light of the averments and statements made hereinafter, with heavy and exemplary costs.
16.That this Hon’ble Court cannot entertain the present complaint, as the answering respondent does not satisfy the definition of ‘respondent’ under Section 2(q) of the DV Act.
17.That this Hon’ble Court cannot entertain the present DV application, as it is vague and lacks the material particulars necessary for invoking the provisions of the DV Act.
18.It is submitted that the purpose underlying the aforesaid requirement is that all allegations made in an application must be specific, and the Court ought not to exercise its jurisdiction without considering a domestic incident report, since it is necessary for the Court to know, before issuing notice to the respondents, as to which of the respondents caused the domestic violence, what was the nature of such violence, and when it was committed or perpetrated. The prescribed proforma specifies different heads of violence, namely: physical violence, noise violence, verbal and emotional abuse, economic violence, dowry-related harassment and other forms of violence. The proforma also provides for the filing of documents in support of the application, such as a medico-legal certificate, a list of 'assets/stridhan' and other documents.
19.That the Complainant has no right to maintain the present DV Application against the Answering Respondents under the D.V. Act, or to seek any protection order under Sections 18, 19, 20 and 22 thereof, when no domestic relationship subsists between the Complainant and the Answering Respondents. A protection order can be obtained only against a person who is in a "domestic relationship", as defined under Section 2(f) of the Act, with the aggrieved person. In order to appreciate this position, it would be appropriate to refer to the definitions of "domestic relationship" and "shared household" as given in Sections 2(f) and 2(s) of the D.V. Act.
20.There is thus, in the present case, neither a 'domestic relationship' nor a 'shared household', as defined in Sections 2(f) and 2(s) of the DV Act. Hence, the Complainant could not have maintained the present complaint under the D.V. Act against the Respondents.
21.In this connection, it is stated that in the case titled S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu (Dead) and Others v. Jagannath (Dead) by LRs and Others, (1994) 1 SC 1, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, per Kuldip Singh, J., observed as follows:
"(i)One who comes to the Court must come with clean hands. A person whose case is based on falsehood has no right to approach the Court. He can be summarily thrown out at any stage of litigation. A judgment or decree obtained by playing fraud on the Court is a nullity and non-est in the eyes of law Citation or ellipsis in quoted judgment. It has to be treated as a nullity by every Court – superior or inferior.
(ii)Fraud is an act of deliberate deception, with the design of securing something by taking unfair advantage of another Citation or ellipsis in quoted judgment. A litigant who approaches the Court is bound to produce all the documents Citation or ellipsis in quoted judgment. If he withholds a vital document in order to gain an advantage over the other side, then he will be guilty of playing a fraud on the Court as well as on the opposite party."
22.That the D.V. Act has been enacted for the purpose of providing monetary assistance to such a mother as is incapable of supporting herself, despite sincere efforts made by her. A spouse who is well qualified to obtain service immediately, with little effort, is not expected to remain idle so as to squeeze out, or milk out, the other spouse by relieving him or her of his or her purse by way of a cut in the nature of pendente lite maintenance.
23.That it is pertinent to mention herein that the Answering Respondents are highly distressed at present on account of the false litigation instituted by the Complainant, and further, that the Respondent is willing to take care of the Complainant, but she has refused such offer.
24.That the Complainant is herself guilty of misconduct. She has deserted and neglected Respondent No. 1, and the Answering Respondents have been humiliated and insulted, not only by the Complainant and her family, but also in society.
25.The Complainant is hedonistic by nature and is concerned only with her own comforts and pleasures, without any care for the Respondents. Hence, the present DV Application is liable to be dismissed, as the Complainant has never performed her functions as a mother. The occasion for filing the present complaint has arisen because the plans of the Complainant to continue to loot and mulct the Respondents have come to naught.
26.It is stated that, as per Sections 2(f) and 2(s) of the D.V. Act, since the Complainant and the Answering Respondents are not residing together, and have never resided together as husband and wife in the same household, any allegations made against the household would not amount to domestic violence, in the absence of a domestic relationship and a shared household as defined under the D.V. Act. In Harbans Lal Malik & Ors. v. Payal Malik, 2010 (3) LRC 177 (Del), the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, while dealing with the definition of "domestic relationship", held as under:
"12. It is apparent that a domestic relationship arises between two persons who have lived together in a shared household and who are related by consanguinity, marriage or through a relationship in the nature of marriage, adoption, or are family members living together as a joint family. The definition speaks of living together at any point of time; however, it does not speak of having a relationship at any point of time. Thus, if the domestic relationship continued, and the parties have lived together at any point of time in a shared household, the person can be a respondent; but if the relationship does not continue, and the relationship was in the past and is not in the present, a person cannot be made a respondent on the ground of a past relationship."
27.It is stated that in Vijay Verma v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2010 (3) LRC 291 (Del), the Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that only violence committed by a person while living in the shared household can constitute domestic violence for the purposes of the D.V. Act. Paragraphs 6 and 7 of the said judgment, being material for the present purpose, are extracted hereunder:
"6. A perusal of this provision makes it clear that a domestic relationship arises in respect of an aggrieved person if the aggrieved person had lived together with the respondent in a shared household. This living together can be either soon before the filing of the petition or 'at any point of time'. The problem arises with the meaning of the phrase 'at any point of time'. Does that mean that living together at any stage in the past would give a person the right to become an aggrieved person and claim a domestic relationship? I consider that 'at any point of time' under the Act only means where an aggrieved person has been continuously living in the shared household as a matter of right, but for some reason the aggrieved person has to leave the house temporarily, and when she returns, she is not allowed to enjoy her right to live in the property. However, 'at any point of time' cannot be defined as 'at any point of time in the past', whether the right to live survives or not. A domestic relationship continues so long as the parties live under the same roof and enjoy living together in a shared household. However, where the living together has been given up, Ellipsis in quoted judgment the domestic relationship comes to an end.
7.For that, the purpose of the Act is to give a remedy to the aggrieved persons against domestic violence. Domestic violence can take place only when one is living in a shared household with the respondents. Ellipsis in quoted judgment Only violence committed by a person while living in the shared household can constitute domestic violence. Ellipsis in quoted judgment Domestic violence is a violence which is committed when the parties are in a domestic relationship, sharing the same household and sharing all the household goods, with an opportunity to commit violence."
28.That the present complaint is not maintainable, as the Complainant has not approached this Hon'ble Court with clean hands and has suppressed true and material facts from this Hon'ble Court.
29.The Complainant is not entitled to any of the reliefs prayed for in the complaint; hence, the same are liable to be rejected. The Complainant is making huge financial claims in the nature of dowry and is adopting every means to humiliate and implicate the Answering Respondents and their family members in one matter or another. Neither did the Respondents commit any domestic violence, nor are the Respondents in any domestic relationship with the Complainant. Hence, the reliefs sought in this complaint are not maintainable, and the same are liable to be rejected.
REPLY ON MERITS
1.That the contents of paragraph 1 of the complaint are a matter of record and require no reply.
2.That the contents of paragraph 2 of the complaint are denied to the extent that
3.That the contents of paragraph 3 of the complaint are a matter of record. It is denied that
4.That the contents of paragraph 4 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
5.That the contents of paragraph 5 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
6.That the contents of paragraph 6 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
7.That the contents of paragraph 7 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
8.That the contents of paragraph 8 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
9.That the contents of paragraph 9 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
10.That the contents of paragraph 10 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
11.That the contents of paragraph 11 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
12.That the contents of paragraph 12 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
13.That the contents of paragraph 13 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
14.That the contents of paragraph 14 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
15.That the contents of paragraph 15 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
16.That the contents of paragraph 16 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
17.That the contents of paragraph 17 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
18.That the contents of paragraph 18 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
19.That the contents of paragraph 19 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
20.That the contents of paragraph 20 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
21.That the contents of paragraph 21 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
22.That the contents of paragraph 22 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
23.That the contents of paragraph 23 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
24.That the contents of paragraph 24 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
25.That the contents of paragraph 25 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
26.That the contents of paragraph 26 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
27.That the contents of paragraph 27 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
28.That the contents of paragraph 28 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
29.That the contents of paragraph 29 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
30.That the contents of paragraph 30 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
31.That the contents of paragraph 31 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
32.That the contents of paragraph 32 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
33.That the contents of paragraph 33 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
34.That the contents of paragraph 34 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
35.That the contents of paragraph 35 of the complaint are wrong and are denied. It is denied that
Inasmuch as no incident, nor the facts and circumstances leading to the filing of the complaint, have been shown or mentioned, no specific reply can be given in their absence. However, the complainant is not entitled to any of the reliefs claimed in the complaint by invoking any of the provisions of the Act, namely Sections 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23 of the Act.
It is respectfully submitted that the present complaint is absolutely false, frivolous, baseless, misconceived and vexatious, even to the knowledge of the complainant herself, besides being unsustainable in law, and is therefore liable to be dismissed with compensatory costs.
P R A Y E R
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that the complaint of the complainant, being false, frivolous and not maintainable in law and on merits, may kindly be dismissed, in the interest of justice.
Pass such other and further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
DELHIRESPONDENTS NO. 2, 3 & 4
THROUGH
DATED: Date of reply
ADVOCATE
Advocate's name and address,
New Delhi-110005.
VERIFICATION
I, the above-named respondents, do hereby verify at Delhi on this Day of verification of reply that the contents of paragraphs 1 to 35 of the reply on merits are true and correct to my knowledge, and that the contents of paragraphs 1 to Number of last preliminary objections paragraph of the preliminary objections to the reply on merits are true and correct on information received and believed to be true. The last paragraph is the prayer clause to this Hon'ble Court.
RESPONDENTS NO. 2, 3 & 4
IN THE COURT OF THE LD. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE (MAHILA COURT), SOUTH-WEST DISTRICT, SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
D.V. CASE NO. DV case number OF 2021
IN THE MATTER OF:
Complainant's name: COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Sh. Deponent's name S/o Late Sh. Deponent's father's name, aged about Deponent's age years, R/o House No. Deponent's house number, presently at New Delhi, who solemnly affirms and declares as under:
1.That I am respondent no. 2 in the above-noted matter, am well conversant with the facts of the case, and am therefore competent to swear this affidavit.
2.That the submissions as to facts made in the accompanying reply to the Domestic Violence Incident Complaint were drafted by my counsel as per my instructions and were read over and explained to me in my vernacular language. The said reply may be read as part and parcel of this affidavit, and the same are not reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
Verified at Delhi on this Day of verification of affidavit that the contents of my above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, no part thereof is false, and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF THE LD. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE (MAHILA COURT), SOUTH-WEST DISTRICT, SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
D.V. CASE NO. DV case number OF 2021
IN THE MATTER OF:
Complainant's name: COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Smt. Deponent's name W/o Sh. Deponent's husband's name, aged about Deponent's age years, R/o Deponent's address, presently at New Delhi, who solemnly affirms and declares as under:
1.That I am respondent no. 3 in the above-noted matter, am well conversant with the facts of the case, and am therefore competent to swear this affidavit.
2.That the submissions as to facts made in the accompanying reply to the Domestic Violence Incident Complaint were drafted by my counsel as per my instructions and were read over and explained to me in my vernacular language. The said reply may be read as part and parcel of this affidavit, and the same are not reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
Verified at Delhi on this Day of verification of affidavit that the contents of my above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, no part thereof is false, and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE COURT OF THE LD. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE (MAHILA COURT), SOUTH-WEST DISTRICT, SAKET COURTS, NEW DELHI
D.V. CASE NO. DV case number OF 2021
IN THE MATTER OF:
Complainant's name: COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mr. Deponent's name S/o Sh. Deponent's father's name, aged about Deponent's age years, R/o Deponent's address, presently at New Delhi, who solemnly affirms and declares as under:
1.That I am respondent no. 4 in the above-noted matter, am well conversant with the facts of the case, and am therefore competent to swear this affidavit.
2.That the submissions on facts contained in the accompanying reply to the Domestic Violence Incident Complaint have been drafted by my counsel in accordance with my instructions; the same have been read over and explained to me in my vernacular language, and they may be treated as part and parcel of this affidavit, and are not reproduced herein for the sake of brevity.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Place of verification on this Day of verification of affidavit day of Month of verification, Year of verification that the contents of my above affidavit are true and correct to my knowledge, that no part thereof is false, and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT