Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

The petitioners had filed an application for dismissal of the complaint filed under the 2005 Act, before the learned Magistrate, inter-alia, pleading that respondent No.1 (daughter- in-law) never resided at Village Mujjafarpur, Jalandhar nor did she have any domestic relationship with them and/or she had shared any household with petitioners, but the said application was dismissed on 23.07.2018, without taking into consideration the said factual position.

It is further submitted that respondent No.1 either remained with her husband at Chandigarh or at Amritsar, which fact had been clearly reflected in her self-declaration form at the time of her appointment as a teacher in the Navodya Vidalaya, Faridkot (Annexure P-11). The complaint under the 2005 Act, 2 of 12 CRM-M-34237-2020 [3] has been pending for the last 4 years and except for one official witness, no evidence has been adduced by complainant- respondent No.1 and the dispute, if any, is between husband and wife. It is further submitted that petitioners No.1 and 2, 65 years and 73 years of age respectively, have been dragged into the present litigation only with a view to harassing them and the allegations contained in the complaint are general and omnibus in nature. Above all petitioner No.2 has been on Dialysis thrice a week and as far as petitioner No.3 is concerned, she is a married sister-in-law of respondent No.1 and being a Government Teacher, she with her two minor children, has been living in her matrimonial home since 2009 at Jalandhar, which is a far away place from her parents i.e. petitioner No.1 and petitioner No.2. Rather in her service record, respondent No.1 has given the address of Chandigarh, where her husband (respondent No.2), resides.