Published on : March 02, 2022 19:46 IST
The Delhi High Court held that a daughter-in-law does not have an indefeasible right of residence in a shared household under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.
Justice Yogesh Khanna was hearing an Appeal by a daughter-in-law against a Trial Court Order denying her the right to stay in her matrimonial house.
He stated that both the in-laws of the Appellant are senior citizens and are entitled to live peacefully, and not be haunted by the marital discord between their son and daughter-in-law (Appellant).
He further stated, “It would be appropriate if an alternative accommodation is provided to the Appellant as directed in the impugned Order as per Section 19(1)(f) of the Protection of Women form Domestic Violence Act.”
The Court noted that there was a frictional relationship between the parties and the husband who was living in a separate rental accommodation had complained against his wife. Also the husband did not claim any Right in the Subject Property.
The Appeal was dismissed by the Court and it recorded the undertaking of the Respondent father-in-law that an alternative accommodation would be provided to the Appellant until the matrimonial relationship exists.
In 2016, a Suit for possession was filed by Respondent father-in-law before the Trial court on the ground that he was the absolute owner of the property. His son had shifted to another place and the Respondent was not inclined to live with his daughter-in-law.
The Appellant contended that the property was purchased using the joint family funds and from sale proceeds of ancestral property and thus claimed that she had the right to reside there.
However, the Trial Court passed the decree of possession in favor of the Respondent holding that the property was a self acquired one and the Appellant had no right to stay there after the termination of her license.
2 min read