Naveen Joseph Raj v. James Belsith
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 30.07.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI and C.M.P.(MD)Nos.12116 & 12117 of 2025 1.Naveen Joseph Raj 2.Ligori Puspharaj 3.Flora Angelin 4.Deena Vinarasi
...Petitioners
Vs.
1.James Belsith 2.Minor N.Nilavan Marx @ Seon Marx (The first respondent is minor and first respondent is the mother and natural guardian)
...Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, praying to strike off the proceedings in D.V.O.P.No.6 of 2025 on the file of the Additional Mahila Court, Dindigul and quash the same. 1/5
For Petitioners : Mr.Vivek Bharathi
O R D E R
This petition has been filed seeking to strike off the proceedings in D.V.O.P.No.6 of 2025 on the file of the Additional Mahila Court, Dindigul.
2. The petitioners herein are the first to fourth respondents in D.V.O.P.No.6 of 2025 before the trial Court. The respondents herein have filed a petition in D.V.O.P.No.6 of 2025 on the file of the Additional Mahila Court, Dindigul, under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the first petitioner is the husband, the second and third petitioners are in-laws and the fourth petitioner is the sister in law of the first respondent. The first respondent has initiated domestic violence proceedings against him and her in-laws. It is submitted that the petitioners are no way connected with the allegations made by the first respondent in the DVC case and though the first petitioner is ready and willing to live with the first respondent, it is only the 1st respondent who is not coming to live with him and has initiated the present case. Therefore, he 2/5
prays that the petitioners may be permitted to raise all the grounds mentioned herein before the trial court. He also requests this Court to dispense with their personal appearance before the trial court.
4. Inspite of issuance of notice, there is no representation for the respondents. However, in view of the nature of the order which this Court is going to pass, which in no way affects the respondents, representation on behalf of the respondents is not necessary.
5. This Court, taking into consideration the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, permits the petitioners to raise all the grounds as raised herein before the trial court at the time of trial. Taking into consideration the request made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, their appearance before the trial court is dispensed with except for their appearance for the purpose of receiving the copy of the proceedings u/s 230 of BNSS, framing of charges, questioning under Section 351 of BNSS and on the day on which judgment is to be pronounced. However, if for any particular reason, the presence of the petitioners is necessary, the trial court, at its wisdom, shall direct him to appear on those days.
3/5
6. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
30.07.2025 Internet:Yes/No Index:Yes/No TSG To 1.The Additional Mahila Court, Dindigul.
2.The Section Officer, VR Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
4/5
M.DHANDAPANI , J.
TSG 30.07.2025 5/5