Daughter In Law Has No Indefeasible Right In Shared Household, In-Laws Cannot Be Excluded: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has ruled that a daughter in law does not have an indefeasible right in a “shared household” and that the in-laws cannot be excluded from the same.“Thus, the concept of ‘shared household’ clearly provides that the right of the daughter-in-law in a shared household is not an indefeasible right and cannot be to the exclusion of the in-laws,” Justice Prathiba M...
The Delhi High Court has ruled that a daughter in law does not have an indefeasible right in a “shared household” and that the in-laws cannot be excluded from the same.
“Thus, the concept of ‘shared household’ clearly provides that the right of the daughter-in-law in a shared household is not an indefeasible right and cannot be to the exclusion of the in-laws,” Justice Prathiba M Singh said in an order passed on May 22.
The court added that the daughter-in-law, while claiming rights to live in her matrimonial home or shared household, cannot argue that the in-laws ought not to live with her in such household.
“If circumstances exist which demonstrate that they cannot live together, alternate accommodation may also have to be explored for the daughter-in-law,” the court said.
The court was hearing a plea moved by a daughter in law against her husband and in-laws who were senior citizens, challenging an order passed by the Divisional Commissioner on March 31.
After the in-laws preferred an eviction petition under the Senior Citizens Act, the District Magistrate in September last year directed eviction of the daughter in law from a 3 BHK floor in South Extension area.
The Divisional Commissioner allowed the appeal by the daughter in law and set aside her eviction. However, the in-laws were also permitted to live in the property along with the daughter in law.
Disposing of the plea, Justice Singh said that the stand of the daughter in law that the in-laws should not be allowed to live in their own property was “completely contrary to the settled understanding on the subject.”
The court thus directed the daughter in law and her son to occupy one room in the property and ordered that the in laws shall also occupy one bedroom.
“The grandson, i.e., Petitioner no.2 shall be permitted to use the third bedroom for his studies, tuitions, etc., However, the said room shall be accessible to all the parties. The common areas such as the kitchen, the drawing and the dining room and staircase, etc., shall be used by all the occupants. The Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are permitted to put up CCTV cameras and the recordings of the same shall be accessible to the Petitioner,” the court said.
It added that the parties shall ensure that they maintain peace and order and do not engage in any acrimony.
Title: RITU CHERNALIA v. AMAR CHERNALIA & ORS.
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 440