prior to the institution of the suit and the question of title need not be considered. The suit is admittedly brought within six months from the date of the plaintiff’s dispossession. Be that as it may, the defendant had filed a DV case in D.V.C.No.388 of 2012 against her father inter alia alleging as follows: “She was being ill-treated by her father from her childhood. She was never given proper food and clothing and was deprived of love and affection of her parents for several years during her entire life. Her marriage was performed forcefully with a person of the choice of her father. He was a drunkard and was a person of bad vices. Having harassed the defendant, he had divorced her. She was left homeless and penniless with three children. Inspite of an order passed by a competent Court, her husband who is absconding is not providing any maintenance to her and her children. Earlier, she was staying in a rented house. She is unable to pay rents. Therefore, she had shifted to her grandfather’s house bearing Door no.17-2-309/3/1 at Kurmaguda, Saidabad, which was vacant, i.e., the suit schedule property. However, the plaintiff/her father is not allowing her to stay in the said house and he is beating her. In fact, he had kicked her out of the house and locked the said house. He is repeatedly throwing her out of the house. Her father, the plaintiff, and her two brothers had threatened her to cause injuries to her if she stayed in the house. The plaintiff is a well settled pensioner and he is economically well-off. He is living in his own separate building.” Having so contended, she sought protection order, residence order, compensation and other reliefs. Her father having denied all her contentions in his counter in the DV case had stated that he had taken care of his daughter very well and provided food, education and clothing to her and that as per her own wish and consent, he had performed her marriage with a person from a good family in the year 1999 by spending huge amount and that they both lived together happily for some time and that the defendant had given birth to three children under lawful wedlock and that after estrangement from her husband, she had filed M.C.No.156 of 2009 on the file of the Court of the learned Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad and is regularly receiving monthly maintenance of Rs.6,600/- from her husband and that the allegations to the contra in her case are all false and that she is originally a resident of a house
