• Divorce case dismissed, can wife ask for maintenance

I (husband) filed divorce case on the basis of cruelty & dissertation but case got dismissed by court after 4 years of battle, my wife is staying for past 5 years at her parents place but now she forced herself in one my parents old property, my father is legal owner. I currently working abroad, and was wondering what can I do legally to ask her to leave the house ?  Does she have any legal right to enter my parents property ? Seems like her lawyer told to stay in my fathers house for 7 days then she can demand maintenance if she leaves that place. Is this true?
I tried every single option to fix this marriage and then try to dissolve it thru court and also thru mutual consent but whatever I decide my wife and her parents take opposite stand. Please let me know what are my legal options.
Asked 1 year ago in Family Law from United States
Religion: Hindu
1) your wife has no right to stay in your father property . 

2) your wife would be entitled to maintenance if she is not working 

3) it is well settled law that daughter in law has no rights on property standing in name of in laws . 

4) your wife can seek alternative accommodation from you  under domestic violence act 
Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
23177 Answers
1217 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
N THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

APPELLATE SIDE

APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 866 OF 2007 IN S.C.SUIT NO. 3072 OF 2007

WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1194 OF 2007

Smtl Hemaxi Atul Joshi … Appellant

(Org.Deft.No.1)

Vs.

Smt. Muktaben Karsandas Joshi Respondents

COram: BHATIA  J 

5th December,2007.

1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2. Admittedly, the appellant, who is defendant No.1, was married to respondent No.2 sometime in the year 1996 and out of this wedlock, they have two children. After the marriage, they were living in the suit house with the other family  members. The relations between the husband and wife got strained and the Marriage Petition for divorce was filed by respondent No.2-husband against the present appellant before the Family Court at Bandra, Mumbai. Plaintiff/Respondent No.1, who is the mother of respondent No.2 and mother-in-law of the appellant, claims that she is the exclusive owner of the suit house and her son and daughter-in-law after the marriage, were living with her in her house. However, in the year 2002, the appellant and respondent No.2 purchased another flat at a short distance from her house and intermittently they also used to live there. Respondent No.1 claims that she and other family members had noticed illicit relationship of the appellant with some other person. This was objected to by her and therefore relations were strained. According to her, the daughter-in-law went to her parents’ place at Surat in May 2007 after the Divorce Petition was filed. However, in the last week of May, 2007, she came back to Mumbai and forcibly entered into the plaintiff’s house and started harassing the plaintiff and her family members. She also abused the plaintiff in filthy language and assaulted her. In view of these circumstances, she filed the suit for perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from entering into and/or occupying and/or remaining in occupation of the suit premises belonging to her. She also took out a Notice of Motion seeking temporary injunction of the same nature. The application was opposed by the present appellant on the ground that the suit house is the matrimonial home and she is entitled to reside there in view of the Protection of Woman from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (in brief, “Domestic Violence Act”).

3. After hearing the parties, the learned Judge of the City Civil Court accepted the contention of the plaintiff and rejected the contention of the defendant No.1-appellant that it is a shared household for the appellant. The learned Judge held that the suit house being the exclusive property of the mother-in-law/plaintiff, the daughter-in-law cannot claim any legal right of residence. In the result, the Notice of Motion was allowed and the temporary injunction was granted against the defendant No.1-appellant. Hence, she has preferred the present Appeal.

4. On perusal of the pleadings of the parties and the impugned order, it becomes clear that the suit house was purchased by the plaintiff/mother-in-law sometime in 1975 and, admittedly, the suit house stands in her name alone. There is nothing to show that it is a joint family property of the plaintiff, her husband and the children. Admittedly, it is not the house belonging to the appellant or her husband. The learned trial Court relied upon an authority of the Supreme Court in S.R.Batra vs. Taruna Batra AIR 2007 SC 1118 wherein the

provisions of the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 came to be considered.

5. Section 19 of the Domestic Violence Act provides protection of residence to the aggrieved person.

Section 19(a) reads as under :-

“19. Residence orders (1) While disposing of an application under sub-section (1) of section 12, the Magistrate may, on being satisfied that domestic violence has taken place, pass a residence order –

(a) restraining the respondent from dispossessing or in any other manner disturbing the possession of the aggrieved person from the shared household, whether or not the respondent has a legal or equitable interest in the shared

household;”

Under Section 2(a) of the Domestic Violence Act, “aggrieved person” means any woman who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the respondent and who alleges to have been subjected to any act of domestic violence by the respondent”. . Section 2(q) defines “respondent” as any adult male person who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the aggrieved person and against whom the aggrieved person has sought any relief under this Act.

Provided that an aggrieved wife or female living in a relationship in the nature of a marriage may also file a complaint against a relative of the husband or the

male partner. . Section 2(s) defines “shared household” as follows :-

“shared household” means a household where the person aggrieved lives or at any stage has lived in a domestic relationship either singly or  along with the respondent and includes such a household whether owned or tenanted either

jointly by the aggrieved person and the respondent, or owned or tenanted by either of them in respect of which either the aggrieved person or the respondent or both jointly or singly have any right, title, interest or equity and includes such a household which may belong to the joint family of which the respondent is a member, irrespective of whether the respondent or the aggrieved person has any right, title or interest in the shared household.”

5. The question is whether merely because the appellant/daughter-in-law was living along with husband in the household of her mother-in-law, she would get a legal right of residence in the house of mother-in-law. Admittedly, the appellant and her husband-respondent NO.2 had purchased another flat in December, 2002 jointly. It is not disputed that intermittently the husband and wife used to sleep and stay in that house. That house is at a walking distance of about 5 minutes from the suit house. The appellant can claim legal right in that house firstly, because it is the joint property of herself and her husband and secondly, because she was intermittently living or at least staying in that house along with her husband and children. As far as the suit house is concerned, it is

not the property in which her husband has got any legal right and therefore she cannot claim that the suit house is the shared household within the meaning of Section 2(s) of the Domestic Violence Act. After referring to the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act and some case law, Their Lordships of the Supreme Court in the case of S.R.Batra vs. Taruna Batra, observed as follows in para

16 of the Judgment :-

“16. There is no such law in India, like the British Matrimonial Homes Act, 1967, and in any case, the rights which may be available under any law can only be as against the husband and not against the father-in-law or mother-in-law.” From this, it is clear that the wife may have rights only against the husband and not against father-in-law or mother-in-law. Their Lordships further observed as

follows :-

“28. As regards Section 17(1) of the Act, in our opinion the wife is only entitled to claim a right to residence in a shared household and a ‘shared household’ would only mean the house belonging to or taken on rent by the husband, or the house which belongs to the joint family of which the husband is a member. The property in question in the present case neither belongs to Amit Batra nor was it taken on rent by him nor is it a joint family property of which the husband is a member. It is the exclusive property of appellant No.2, mother of Amit Batra. Hence it cannot be called a ‘shared household’.

The facts in the case of S.R.Batra and the present matter are almost similar. Taking into consideration the legal position and the facts, the appellant cannot

claim any legal right of residence in the house belonging to her mother-in-law. She can claim such right only in the house of her husband and incidentally in the present case, she and her husband jointly own another house at a short distance from the suit house. Taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances, the learned trial Court Judge was justified in passing the order of temporary injunction restraining the defendant-appellant from entering into

the suit house and causing interference in possession of her mother-in-law on the suit house.

6. In the result, the Appeal stands dismissed.

7. As the Appeal itself is dismissed, the Civil

Application does not survive and stands disposed of accordingly.

(J.H.BHATIA,J.)

Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
23177 Answers
1217 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Hi, if the property is belongs to your father then ask your father to issues legal notice and vacate from house through the process of the court.

2.As  far as maintenanc is concerned it is you duty to pay thamount and suppose if she is not staying in the house then also you are liable to pay the amount.
Pradeep Bharathipura
Advocate, Bangalore
4104 Answers
133 Consultations
4.3 on 5.0
1. Your father can file for the eviction of your wife from the property which is owned by her. A woman has no right in the property of her in-laws. Prior to this he can issue a lawyer's notice to her. If better sense still does not prevail on her he may go to court. 

2. Her staying in the house of her father-in-law has no legal relation with her claim of maintenance. A claim for maintenance can sustain independently of her stay in the property of her in-laws.

3. You can rebut her claim in the court if she is earning on her own.
Ashish Davessar
Advocate, Jaipur
18088 Answers
447 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
1)you have not mentioned your income . if wife is not working court will award her maintenance 

2) you can appoint advocate to appear on your behalf if you are working abroad 

3) give a power of attorney in favour of family member 

4) court may award your 1/3rd income as maintenance 

5) you cannot file for divorce merely because your wife is seeking maintenance 
Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
23177 Answers
1217 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
She cannot claim rights in your parents owned property, but she can claim residential rights in her matrimonial home.   If this was her matrimonial home, she can seek residential rights in it or you can arrange a separate accommodation for her to stay and live. 
Besides she can also seek monthly maintenance amount if she is not employed or having sufficient sources of income to sustain her living. 
Why was the case dismissed?, why did you not prefer an appeal?
T Kalaiselvan
Advocate, Vellore
13969 Answers
127 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Dear Querist
if the absolute owner of this property is your father then immediately file a civil suit for eviction and injunction against her before civil court, she has no right over the property of her in-laws as per law.
Nadeem Qureshi
Advocate, New Delhi
3523 Answers
130 Consultations
4.9 on 5.0
The father can file an eviction proceedings as the wife has no right over the property of the father in law as that cannot be considered as her matrimonial house. She doesnt have any legal right to enter the parents property. 

Further if the wife is capable to maintain herself then she cannot file maintenance or demand maintenance from you however if she is not able to make both ends meet, then the court will direct you to pay the maintenance amount to her on the basis of your salary. In the maintenance petition, the wife can claim a residence as well from you and the court may direct you to give extra money for residence.
Shaveta Chaudhary (Sanghi)
Advocate, Chandigarh
821 Answers
60 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Prefer an appeal against the dismissal of Divorce under the ground cruelty & dissertation.She has no right over your parents property.Your father can file a suit for eviction and injunction against your wife.You are bound to provide alternative accommodation to her.Your wife would be entitled to get maintenance from you.
Ajay N S
Advocate, Ernakulam
1911 Answers
19 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0

Ask a Lawyer

Get legal answers from top-rated lawyers in 1 hour. It's quick, easy, and anonymous!
Ask a Lawyer

Family Lawyers

T Kalaiselvan
Advocate, Vellore
13969 Answers
127 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
23177 Answers
1217 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Ashish Davessar
Advocate, Jaipur
18088 Answers
447 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Krishna Kishore Ganguly
Advocate, Kolkata
12088 Answers
229 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Devajyoti Barman
Advocate, Kolkata
5189 Answers
54 Consultations
4.9 on 5.0
Nadeem Qureshi
Advocate, New Delhi
3523 Answers
130 Consultations
4.9 on 5.0
Rajgopalan Sripathi
Advocate, Hyderabad
868 Answers
43 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Atulay Nehra
Advocate, Noida
434 Answers
15 Consultations
4.7 on 5.0
Shivendra Pratap Singh
Advocate, Lucknow
2735 Answers
41 Consultations
4.9 on 5.0
Ajay N S
Advocate, Ernakulam
1911 Answers
19 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0