LAVANYA vs GOBINATH — 44/2023

Case under Domestic Violence Act, 2005 Section 18,19,20,22. Status: Mediation. Next hearing: 30th April 2026.

DVC - Domestic Violence Case

CNR: TNKR100010722023

Mediation

Next Hearing

30th April 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

1072/2023

Filing Date

16-06-2023

Registration No

44/2023

Registration Date

16-06-2023

Court

Additional Mahila Court at Magisterial Level, Karur

Judge

13-Judicial Magistrate Additional Mahila Court Karur

Acts & Sections

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT, 2005 Section 18,19,20,22
MP/1/2026 Classification : 126 Cr.PC Section LAVANYA

Petitioner(s)

LAVANYA

Adv. T.VEERAMANI

Respondent(s)

GOBINATH

DEVI

Adv. A.RAMESH

KUMARESAN

Adv. A.RAMESH

Hearing History

Judge: 13-Judicial Magistrate Additional Mahila Court Karur

30-03-2026

Mediation

09-03-2026

Restored

09-03-2026

Counter

25-10-2024

Disposed

23-10-2024

Orders

Interim Orders

25-10-2024
Copy of Judgment

Court Order Summary The Additional Mahila Court, Karur partly allowed a petition under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The court found that petitioner Lavanya was subjected to domestic violence (physical abuse, dowry harassment, and economic deprivation) by her mother-in-law (2nd respondent) and brother-in-law (3rd respondent). The court rejected her request for property partition but granted: (1) a protection order restraining the respondents from domestic violence; (2) a residence order directing the 2nd respondent to provide accommodation with all facilities; and (3) compensation of Rs. 2,00,000 to the petitioner. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Order Summary The Additional Mahila Court, Karur partly allowed a petition under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The court found that petitioner Lavanya was subjected to domestic violence (physical abuse, dowry harassment, and economic deprivation) by her mother-in-law (2nd respondent) and brother-in-law (3rd respondent). The court rejected her request for property partition but granted: (1) a protection order restraining the respondents from domestic violence; (2) a residence order directing the 2nd respondent to provide accommodation with all facilities; and (3) compensation of Rs. 2,00,000 to the petitioner. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Additional Mahila Court at Magisterial Level, Karur All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case