High Court Decision: A daughter-in-law has this much right in the property of her in-laws, the High Court gave its verdict
Delhi High Court Important Remark: In today's time, it has been seen in many cases that the in-laws are so upset with their daughter-in-law that they do not want to live with her at any cost. The High Court has given an important decision regarding this. The High Court made it clear in its decision that under domestic violence, no daughter-in-law has the right to live in the house. She can be evicted from the property by the elderly people of her in-laws. No one can stop them from doing this. Let us know the news in detail below--
HR Mandi Bhav , Digital Desk-New Delhi: - The Delhi High Court has said that under the Domestic Violence Act, a daughter-in-law does not have the right to live in a shared house and can be evicted on the orders of elderly in-laws. In fact, Justice Yogesh Khanna, who was hearing an appeal by a daughter-in-law against a lower court order.
In which she was not given the right to stay in the matrimonial house, held that in the case of a shared house, the owner of the property can evict his daughter-in-law. In the present case, it would be appropriate that the appellant be provided with an alternate accommodation till her marriage continues.
Mother-in-law and father-in-law have the right to live in peace- Court
The judge said that in the present case both the in-laws are senior citizens who are entitled to live in peace and not be affected by marital discord between their son and daughter-in-law. The court said in the order that since the relationship between the two parties is not good, it would not be appropriate at the end of life that the aged parents should live with the appellant.
Therefore, it would be appropriate if the appellant is provided with an alternative accommodation, as directed in the order passed under Section 19(1)(f) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. The
husband had also filed a complaint against his wife
The court said the relationship between the parties was not "amicable" and even a complaint was filed by the husband against his wife, who lived in a separate rental accommodation and has not claimed any rights in the subject property.
The court held that the right to residence under Section 19 of the DV Act is not an inalienable right to live in a shared house, especially when the daughter-in-law is against the aged father-in-law and mother-in-law. In this case, both being senior citizens of about 74 and 69 years of age and being in the last days of their lives, are entitled to live in peace and should not be made the victim of marital discord between their son and daughter-in-law.