Saranya v. Nandini. P

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 17-03-2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI AND CMP NO. 7347 OF 2026

1. Saranya W/o. Raghavendar, No.3, Noor Veerasamy Street, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 34. The address mentioned in the Complaint as No. 2/147 A, Indira Nagar 1st St Kovur, Chennai 128

2. Raghavendar S/o. Lakshmi Narayanan, No.3, Noor Veerasamy Street, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 34. The address mentioned in the Complaint as No. 2/147 A, Indira Nagar 1st St Kovur, Chennai 128 Petitioner(s) Vs

1. Nandini. P W/o. Diwakar No. 36/84, A1 Muthaiah Street Vellalar, Teynampet Chennai 86 Respondent(s) PRAYER To call for the records in DVC No. 3 of 2025 on the file of the Honble Judicial Magistrate Poonamalle and quash the same and pass such other orders as this Honble Court.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.G.Murugendran For Respondent(s):

ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition has been filed to call for the records in DVC No. 3 of 2025 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Poonamalle and quash the same.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners herein are ranked as 4th and 5th respondents in DVC No. 3 of 2025. The petitioners filed this petition to strike off the plaint stating that the petitioners were falsely implicated in this case. Admittedly, the petitioners are not living with the complainant in the same house and there is no specific accusations or averment against the petitioners in the complaint without which they were falsely implicated in this case. Further, the petitioners do not have domestic relationship as defined under Section 2(f) of Domestic Violence Act. Therefore, the entire case against the petitioners is not established or prima facie made out and as such, it is abuse of process of law. Hence, he prays to allow this petition.

3. Heard the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner.

4. On perusal of records, it reveals that the defacto complainant has alleged that she was assaulted by five known persons using bare hands on 18.01.2015 and also on the date of occurrence she gave a complaint wherein the name of the petitioners were mentioned as Sister-in-law and her husband. Therefore, this Court is of the view that whether the petitioners were assaulted,

as alleged the complainant has to be proved only after full trial. At this stage it cannot be decided. The petitioners are entitled to take all defence before the Trial Court. For the aforesaid reason this Court is not inclined to strike off the plaint. However, since it is a dispute between family members, this Court is inclined to refer this matter for mediation. Accordingly, both parties are directed to appear before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre attached to this Court on 10.04.2026. If the mediation is not arrived at, the Trial Court is directed to proceed with the case after 24.04.2026 and pass the order without being influenced by any of the observation made in this order.

4. In the result, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed. No Costs. Pending petition(s), if any, is/are closed.

17-03-2026 pbl Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes To

1. The Judicial Magistrate Poonamalle.

2. The Section officer, V. R Section, High Court, Madras.

3. The Mediation and Conciliation Centre, Chennai.

T.V.THAMILSELVI J.

pbl AND CMP NO. 7347 OF 17-03-2026