written statement in domestic violence act suit | reply of dv act | Ws 125 Crpc

Written statement in domestic violence act suit | reply of dv act | Ws 125 Crpc |

In the Hon’ble court of Illaqua Magistrate _____________

Smt. ________ Vs. Sh. ________

Petition under section 12,18,19,20,21 & 22 of D.V Act.

Reply to the petition on behalf of the respondents.

R/Madam,

The answering respondents respectfully submits as under :-

Preliminary objections :

1.   That the present petition of the petitioner is not maintainable against the answering respondents because petitioner no. 1 did not want to join the conjugal company of the respondent no. 1 without any sufficicent reason and rhyme and the petitioner no. 1 herself left the house of the respondents and has falsely implicated the answering respondents no. 1 to 5 in the present litigation.
2.   That the petitioner no. 1 has not come to this Hon’ble court with clean hands and she has suppressed the true and material facts from the Hon’ble court and as such the present petition of the petitioners is liable to be dismissed.
3. That the petitioner no. 1 has filed the present petition with malafide intention and with the sole motive to harass the answering respondents as the present petition is based on false and fabricated facts and as such the petition is liable to be dismissed on this ground also.
4.        That the petitioner has got no cause of action to file the present petition against the answering respondents.
5.        That the petitioner has got no locus standi to file the present petition against the answering respondents.
6.        That the petitioner is estopped from filing the present petition by her own act and conduct.
7.        That the facts and circumstances stated in this petition by the petitioner are totally wrong, illegal, false, fabricated, vexatious one and hence the petition is liable to be dismissed with costs.
8.   That the petitioner has suppressed the actual and material facts before this Hon’ble court as the petitioner herself left the house of the respondents and she also took away all the golden and silver ornaments from the house of the respondents. It is also submitted that the respondent no. 1 several times visited the parental house of the petitioner no. 1 to bring back her but the she straightly refused to live with the respondent. It is also submitted that the respondent no. 1 is still ready and willing to keep the petitioners in her matrimonial home.

Reply parawise:-

1-          That para no. 1 of the petition is correct and admitted.
2-          That the para no. 2 of the petition is also correct and admitted.
3-          That the para no. 3 of the petitioner is wrong and denied and not admitted. It is denied that the father of the petitioner no. 1 and have spent huge amount in the said marriage. However it is submitted that the marriage of the petitioner no. 1 with the respondent no. 1 was quite a very simple marriage because both the families of respondents and petitioner belongs to a poor class family.
4- That the para no. 4 of the petitioner is vehemently wrong and denied as alleged by the petitioner. It is wrong and denied that the respondents did not satisfied with the dowry given by the parents to the respondents and just after the marriage the respondent no. 1 to 5 in collusion with each other started harassing the petitioner no. 1 for bringing less dowry. It is also wrong and denied that they started taunting that the parents of the petitioner no. 1 have not given sufficient dowry, and the respondents started giving beatings to the petitioner no. 1 occasionally from time to time. It is also wrong and denied that the respondents used to raise the demand of additional dowry from her in the shape of Swift Dezire car and the respondents said that they will properly keep the petitioner no. 1 if their said demand will fulfilled by the parents of the petitioner no. 1. The rest contents of this para are also wrong and denied. It is submitted that the answering respondents never beaten up the petitioner for less dowry and they never demand any dowry from the petitioner no. 1. Moreover the answering defendant no. 2 to 5 were living separately from the petitioner no. 1 and they have no concern with the present petition. The all allegations regarding dowry demand are false, fabricated and concocted one. The petitioner no. 1 has made false allegations against the answering respondents to implicate them in false case.
5- That the para no. 5 of the petition is also wrong and denied. It is denied that the respondent no. 4 tried to rape with the petitioner no. 1. The rest contents of this para are also wrong and denied. It is submitted that the respondents belongs to a very respectable family and to defame the respondents, the petitioner no. 1 imposed such false allegation of rape against the respondents.

6- That the para no. 6 of the petition is wrong and denied. It is denied that the respondent no. 1 has illegal affair with the respondent no. 5 and when the petitioner no. 1 requested the respondent no. 1 to not to do such things then he will not adhere on the request of the petitioner no. 1 and they gave merciless beatings to the petitioner no. 1 and they have snatched all the golden and silver ornaments of the petitioner no. 1. It is submitted that the petitioner no. 1 did not want to join the conjugal company of the respondent no. 1 and herself left the company of the respondent no. 1 and now in order to implicate the respondents she made such false allegations against the respondent no. 1 and his family members.

7-          That the para no. 7 of the petition is also wrong and denied. It is denied that at about Two and half year ago, the respondents in collusion with each other due to non fulfillment of dowry demands gave merciless beatings to the petitioner no. 1 and they pushed out the petitioner no.1 from their house and gave threatened to the petitioner no. 1 that if you will come in house again then we will kill you. It is also denied that the parents of the petitioner no. 1 came to the house of respondents and they tried to patch up the matter with the respondents but the respondent did not listen and they misbehaved with the parents of the petitioner no. 1 and they pushed out them from their house. It is also denied that at that time the petitioner no.1 was pregnant. It is submitted that all the allegations leveled against the answering respondents are false, fabricated and imaginary one. The petitioner no. 1 left the house of the respondent No.1 herself without any reasonable cause and rhyme and without any prior permission and consent of the respondent No.1 in the absence of the respondent No.1. It is further submitted that the petitioner no. 1 while leaving the house of respondent no. 1 also took away the entire gold and silver ornaments with her. And when on next day, the respondent no. 1 went to the house of the petitioner no. 1 and requested her to join the company of the respondent No.1 but the petitioner no. 1 clearly refused to join her matrimonial house. The parents of the petitioner no. 1 also insulted the respondent No.1 and they told that they would not send back the petitioner no. 1 with the respondent No.1.
8-   That the para no. 8 of the petition is wrong and denied as alleged by the petitioner no. 1. It is submitted that since the time of the marriage of the petitioner no. 1, the petitioner no. 1 many a times left the house of the respondents and she was usually in the habit of leaving the her matrimonial house.
9-          That the para no. 9 of the petition is also wrong and denied and not admitted. The petitioner no. 1 has no valid cause of action to file the present petition. It is submitted the parents of the petitioner no. 1 never conveyed any panchayat at the house of respondents. It is pertinent to mention here that the petitioner no. 1 herself do not want to reside with the respondent no. 1 despite of several panchayat conveyed by the respondents.
10-       That the para no. 10 of the petition is also wrong and denied. However if any complaint is moved by the petitioner no. 1 against the respondents then the same is false and fabricated.
11-       That the para no. 11 of the petition is also wrong and denied. It is submitted that the petitioner no. 1 is not entitled to any such kind of relief as she left the house of respondent no. 1 herself on her own will and wish. The respondent no. 1 is ready to keep and maintain the petitioner at his house.
12-       That the para no. 12 of the petition is also wrong and denied. It is denied the respondent no. 1 works in a transport company and he has agrl. Land and from these sources the respondent no. 1 is earning more than Rs. 45,000/- per month. The rest contents of this para are also wrong and denied. It is submitted that the respondent no. 1 is a daily wage worker and the respondent no. 1 is ready to keep the petitioners at his house but the petitioner no. 1 herself is not ready to live with the respondent no. 1, so the petitioner no. 1 is not entitled to get any maintenance from the respondent no. 1.
13-       That the para no. 13 of the petition is a legal para. Hence needs no reply.
14-       That the para no. 14 of the petition is legal one.
Reply to prayer :-
                      The prayer clause of the application is wrong and denied. It is submitted that applicants/petitioners are not entitled to get any relief sought for U/s 18, 19, 20, 21 & 22 of the act as the petition is based upon the false, fabricated points and there is no weight in the petition of the petitioners hence the same is liable to be dismissed with cost, in the larger interest of justice.
                                                          Replying Respondents
Through Counsel

        In the Hon’ble court of Illaqua Magistrate
                   Smt. _______ etc.               Vs. Sh. ______ etc.
Petition under section 12,18,19,20,21 & 22 of D.V Act.

Reply to the application U/s 23 of Domestic Violence Act for interim relief on behalf of the respondents.

R/Madam,
                The answering respondents submits as under :-
1-    That the para no. 1 of the application is formal. However the respondents have filed the written statement of the petition and the reply of the same may kindly be read as part and parcel of this reply.
2-    That the para no. 2 of the application is correct and admitted.
3-    That the para no. 3 of the application is wrong and denied. It is wrong to allege that the respondents have turned out the petitioner no. 1 along with her minor girl child from the matrimonial home in wearing clothes only after giving merciless beatings to the petitioner no. 1 for not fulfilling their illegal dowry demands and has treated the petitioner no. 1 with cruelty. It is also denied that the petitioner no. 1 is unable to maintain herself and her minor child and she is residing at her parental house on their mercy and the father of the petitioner no.1 is a poor person and is also unable to maintain the petitioners, whereas the respondent no. 1 works in a transport company and he has agrl. land also and from these sources he is earning more than Rs. 45,000/- per month and despite of this he intentionally and willfully fails to maintain the petitioners despite having good income as such the respondent no. 1 is legally duty bound to maintain the petitioners. It is submitted that the answering respondents never beaten up the petitioner no. 1 for less dowry and the answering respondents never beaten and never demand dowry from the petitioner no. 1. The petitioner has made false allegations against the answering respondents to implicate them in false case. It is submitted that the respondent no. 1 is a daily wage worker and the respondent no. 1 is ready to keep the petitioners at his house but the petitioner no. 1 herself is not ready to live with the respondent no. 1, so the petitioner no. 1 is not entitled to get any maintenance from the respondent no. 1.
4-    That the para no. 4 of the application is wrong and denied. The petitioners are not entitled to get any maintenance amount from the respondent no. 1 as per the submissions made in reply of the petition.
               It is therefore prayed that the petitioner/applicants are not entitled for any kind of maintenance, hence the same is liable to be dismissed with costs, in the interest of justice.
Dated: .                                                             Respondents
Through Counsel