Except for a paltry maintenance and residence order, rest of the beggings are dismissed by the Hon’ble Court in this DV Case.Shaik Sahanaj Begum Vs Shaik Mohammed Rafi on 29 October, 2015
This DVC is dismissed for Default, as there is no representation for Complainant knife.Nallappagari Parvathamma Vs Nallapagari Bhaskar Reddy on 9 December, 2015
This DV is settled out of court and the couple started living together.G.Nagarani Vs G.Suresh Kumar Raju on 29 June, 2015
A well-reasoned judgment from Hon’ble First Class Magistrate ably supported by a catena of judgments held that this DVC was an attempt by the knife to usurp the property and nothing to do with domestic violence.
Last nail in the coffin on the money-hungry, gold-diggin knife:
A.Sujatha Vs C.Nagaraju on 29 January, 2016
When she is having capacity to maintain herself then extending her palm for the alms of the respondent is highly un-acceptable. So as per the Domestic Violence Act, though it is a beneficial legislation but the basic principles cannot be deviated under the facts and circumstances of this case and the petitioner is not entitled to claim any maintenance and for residence.
Economic abuse is established in this DV case from Anantapur DV Cases Series. Gross misuse of power or glorified ineptness towards differentiating between a Civil Suit for property and giving Residence (not property) Order under DV Act.Harijana Thodugu Mannala Savithramma Vs Harijana Thodugu Mannala Vijaya Simha on 17 February, 2012