1) suit should be filed where flat is situated 

2) suit should be filed against husband and father in law 

3) better option would be to seek restoration of DV case dismissed for non prosecution 

4) 

section 28 Clause-II of the Domestic Violence Act empowers the Court to lay down its own procedure for the disposal of any application filed of the D.V. Act and further observing that technicalities should not come in the way of justice and the matter should be decided on merit.

6. Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the matter Tajinder Pal Singh v. State & Ors., Crl. M.C. 1396/2012 with Crl. M.A. No. 4935-4936/2012 has come across with the similar proposition and observed as under:

"It is true that the complaint dismissed in default cannot be restored by the Magistrate under the provisions of Cr. P.C. as there is no specific provision of such eventuality.

5) Further in the judgment Jaydipsinh Prabhatsinh Jhala & Ors. v. State of gujarat & Ors., 2010 CRI. L. J. 2462, Hon'ble Gujarat High Court observed that the Magistrate in deciding the application under section 12 (1) of the Act is not bound by the straight jacket formulas or procedure laid down under Cr. P.C. and in the given case, it would be open for the Magistrate to make deviation thereof as may be found necessary in the interest of justice. In view of aforesaid discussion, I am of the opinion that trial court is fully vested with power to restore the complaint under section 12 of the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act when dismissed in default.

1. See if the main matter is disposed the inter in order passer does not hold good, wife should file for restoration of main matter.

Also the civil suit can be filed at place where the property is situated.

2. Against the owner of the house.

3. Suit seeking permanent injunction can be filed though in.this case DV is dismissed that shall have adverse effect on case as wife should continue the prosecution.

1.File it where the flat is situated. 

2.Owner of the flat will suffice. 

3. 36,37, 38 of specific relief Act

Hi

The suit for injunction can be filed at thane and all the three of them can be made respondents in the case.

Thanks 

1. jurisdiction is MUMBAI, where the suit property i.e. flat is situated,

2. suit will be filed only against the owner of the property,

3. section 37

1. The jurisdiction is at Mumbai , where the flat is situated.

2. Against the owner of the flat i.e. Father of husband

3. under section 37 of specific relief Act.Temporary and perpetual injunctions.

1. Please be aware that the injunction order granted in the DV case also extinguishes when the DV case was dismissed, hence she may not be able to file an injunction suit based on the DV case order.

She can file an injunction suit separately before a jurisdictional court in Mumbai seeking to restrain her father in law from alienating the property in any manner, since it is her shared household or to provide an alternate accommodation to her before selling this property.

2. The suit may be filed agaisnt the father in law and her husband because the property belongs to her father in law and she entered into that house after marrying her husband, hence they both can be impleaded as defendants.

3. She can file a suit under order 39 Rule 1 and 2 and section 151 cpc itself

1. Jurisdiction will be at Mumbai as it will be a civil Suit related to property. 

2. Suit should be filed against all three respondents along with revenue department.

On basis of court orders wife can file suit in Mumbai seek injunction restraining husband and father in law from selling the flat 

It is pertinent on the part of the plaintiff to make a mention about the history of this suit already filed before another court and she was permitted to withdraw the same by an order of the court with liberty to file a fresh suit as per the provisions of Order XXIII Rule 1(3) of CPC. 

This will provide her a safe passage because suppressing this fact may draw a flak and even an adverse impact over the prosecution of her fresh case.

Yes it is necessary to mention the earlier suit filed and the earlier order passed.

Yes it's necessary