Vidhiya vs Madhavan — 29/2024
Case under Domestic Violence Act, 2005 Section 12,19,20,22. Disposed: Contested--Partially Allowed on 10th April 2026.
DVC - Domestic Violence Case
CNR: TNMY080049032024
Filing Number
4895/2024
Filing Date
28-10-2024
Registration No
29/2024
Registration Date
28-10-2024
Court
Judicial Magistrate Court, Sirkali
Judge
1-Judicial Magistrate
Decision Date
10th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Partially Allowed
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Vidhiya
Respondent(s)
Madhavan
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Judicial Magistrate
Disposed
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 10-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 06-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 26-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 24-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 12-03-2026 | Arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: DVC No. 29/2024 - Vidya v. Madhavan The Judicial Magistrate Court at Sirkali partly allowed Vidya's domestic violence petition against her husband Madhavan. The court found the respondent committed domestic violence through physical beatings, verbal abuse, drug addiction, endangering behavior (allowing a friend to attempt molestation), and concealing his prior marriage. The court awarded: (1) a protection order prohibiting further harm; (2) monthly maintenance of Rs. 5,000 from October 2024 onwards; and (3) compensation of Rs. 5,000. However, the court rejected her stridhana (marriage gift) claim due to insufficient proof of ownership. The respondent's failure to contest the case strengthened the petitioner's case under the preponderance of probability standard applicable in domestic violence proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Case Summary: DVC No. 29/2024 - Vidya v. Madhavan The Judicial Magistrate Court at Sirkali partly allowed Vidya's domestic violence petition against her husband Madhavan. The court found the respondent committed domestic violence through physical beatings, verbal abuse, drug addiction, endangering behavior (allowing a friend to attempt molestation), and concealing his prior marriage. The court awarded: (1) a protection order prohibiting further harm; (2) monthly maintenance of Rs. 5,000 from October 2024 onwards; and (3) compensation of Rs. 5,000. However, the court rejected her stridhana (marriage gift) claim due to insufficient proof of ownership. The respondent's failure to contest the case strengthened the petitioner's case under the preponderance of probability standard applicable in domestic violence proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts