File appeal against residence order passed by magistrate court 

since mother is absolute owner of house your wife has no rights on said property 

- As per law, your wife having no right over the property of your mother , except the residence right from you . 

- Your mother should file a suit for Mandatory injunction before the court for evicting her . 

- Further if she is an old aged lady , then she can also approach under the senior citizen act as well. 

- Further , your mother can also file a complaint under the domestic violence act against her daughter in law and others for harassment meted out to her . 

- Since, the court has already given interim residence order , then your mother can file an appeal before the session judge in that court for cancelling the said order. 

In 2007, the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act (Senior Citizens Act) was passed to provide maintenance support to elderly parents and senior citizens. Under this law, parents can claim maintenance from adult children and grandchildren for food, residence, clothing, etc.

It also has provisions to safeguard parents’– and in-laws’– right to property through giving them the choice to evict the daughter-in-law from their own property in case of family disputes. This is because daughter-in-laws have a right under the Domestic Violence Act, 2005, right to reside in a ‘shared household’ or the ‘matrimonial household’ during and after domestic violence proceedings.

Thus, the Senior Citizens Act and the Domestic Violence Act end up working at cross purposes. Past judgments have been unable to clarify whether – and in what circumstances – the right of daughters-in-law to reside in a shared household under the Domestic Violence Act takes precedence over the right of the parents-in-law to evict the daughter-in-law from their property under the Senior Citizens Act.

As a result, judgments have been inconsistent and have failed to render justice to deserving parties. The lack of consensus on the definition of a ‘shared household’ in the Domestic Violence Act is a key reason. This and more reasons are explained in the blog below.

Reason for inconsistent judgments by courts: No clear definition of ‘shared household’

Shared household includes property of in-laws

The Supreme Court, in S.R Batra and Anr.v. Taruna Batra (2007), had held that during or after proceedings, the wife is only entitled to claim the right to residence in a shared household which includes the house belonging to or taken on rent by the husband, or a house which belongs to a joint family of which the husband is a members subject to conditions. 

However, many decisions post Taruna Batra have held that daughters-in-law have the right to continue to live in their shared household irrespective of whether the property belongs to the in-laws or not, but only under the condition that the daughter-in-law has no alternate accommodation or any such accommodation made available by the husband.

Also, while the Supreme Court in Taruna Batra gave an expansive interpretation to the term ‘shared household’, another bench of the Supreme Court in Vimalben Ajitbhai Patel and Ors. Vs Vatslabeen Ashokbhai Patel and Ors. (2008) narrowly interpreted the same. In the latter judgment, the Court held that if the house of the in-laws is owned exclusively by them, the house would not constitute a ‘shared household’ under Section 2(s) of the Domestic Violence Act.

Not only has this judgment resulted in denial of a woman’s right of residence in her in-laws’ house, but has also impacted several High Courts’ judgments on the interpretation of the term. For instance, in Shumita Didi Sandhu v. Sanjay Singh Sandhu & Ors. (2010), the Delhi High Court held that the right of residence under the Domestic Violence Act does not mean the right to reside in a particular property but the right to reside in a ‘commensurate property’ belonging to the husband or the in-laws, which does not allow her exclusive right to her marital house.

Guidelines to achieve balance between the Domestic Violence Act and Senior Citizens Act

The Delhi High Court, in Vinay Varma v KanishaParishcha(2019), attempted to address the lack of clarity in the two Acts by issuing six broad guidelines to be followed by Courts. These largely are:

• The Courts have to ascertain the nature of the relationship between the daughter-in-law and the parents, and have to determine whether she was living in a joint family.

• As per the guidelines, if the parents decide to evict the daughter, the husband has the duty to take care of the wife by paying maintenance under the Domestic Violence law. In scenarios where parents are seen colluding with their son, the obligation to take care and provide shelter to the daughter-in-law would fall on the husband as well as the parents.

• The parents may claim exclusive possession of the property in situations where their son is ill-treating them or if he has abandoned both the parents and his wife or children. The parents would, however, have to provide shelter to the daughter-in-law for a reasonable period if they had lived together in a joint family.

The problem with such guidelines is that it is difficult to put such a restrictive formula on adjudicating the right of residence of a woman/daughter-in-law in domestic violence cases. The guidelines only serve as an indicative list for the purpose of enforcement as they don’t account for or encompass all types of situations and hence, cannot be definitive.

It becomes evident on analysing judgments such as Taruna Batra that the principles formulated by the Court limited itself to the Domestic Violence Act and did not consider the issue of any conflict with the Senior Citizens Act.

The laws need to clearly determine under which circumstances the rights of daughters-in-law gain precedence over the rights of parents-in-law. In conclusion, it may be said that an appropriate amendment in Section 17 of the domestic violence law to harmonise the Domestic Violence Act and Senior Citizens Act is required.

In view of Krishan Kumar vs Navneet's case (supra) and Varinder Kaur vs Jitender Kumar's case (supra), the parents-in-law of the self-acquired property are the real owners and the daughter-in-law has no right to claim it as shared house and has no right of residence in the self-acquired property of parents-in-law. The daughter-in-law cannot be allowed to live in the house of parents-in-law against their wishes.

While relying upon S.R. Batra and another vs Smt. Taruna Batra, 2007(1) RCR (Criminal) 403 in Suman vs Tulsi Ram 2015(1) RCR (Civil) 304, it was held that daughter-in-law does not have any right of protection under Section 17 of the Act for the purpose of living in the house belonging to parents-in-law which is exclusively owned by them.

The position of law is clear that the daughter in law has no right in the property belonging to her mother or father in law. You don't require any citation to establish this legal fact.

The court has passed an interim order giving her residence rights in that house since she claims it as  shared household.

To nullify her claim her husband has to provide residence to her outside his mother's house.

She is entitled to residential rights till such time she is his legally wedded wife.

However if she has been provided accommodation elsewhere by her husband, then his mother can very well prove that with evidence and request the court to vacate the said interim orders passed in the DVC granting her residence rights.

.

File appeal against the order. Daughter in law have no right to live in in laws property. This is very clear law and reiterated by almost all high courts and SC of India.

Also file application under senior citizen act.

Residence order is suffered by perversity. 

If your mother is the owner of of the property then your wife is not entitled to reside in the said property. 

Therefore the Magistrate by no means direct her in laws to let reside in the said property. 

So this is a good case where you can challenge this order by filing Appeal against the order. 

There is SC order in your favour . Ask your advocate. 

Daughter-in-law does not have rights in the self owned properties of in-laws. Plus your wife can't remove your mother out of the house as per senior citizens act your mother can complaint in nearest police station and entered in the house and stay there. 

Plus as per the court order for time being your mother also can't evicate your wife from house till hearing is finished.

Now ask your mother to make appeal and want to sale or give property on rent due to financial crises and unable to maintain day today expenses or daughter-in-law should provide all expenses if she is earning women or vacate the house as mother is self owner and want to sell the property. Actually you need not sale but have to give reasons.

Yes daughter in law only enjoys at the most residence rights only if it's matrimonial house as per latest Bombay High court judgement. But SC has cleared it that the daughter in law will not have any right in the self acquired house of in-laws unless it's a joint family property having husband share in it

Dear Client,

If your mother is 60 years old then she may file a case under Senior Citizen Act and evict your wife or may demand Maintenance also.

You mother may challenge the Order of the court in Higher court.

You should have filed a domestic violence case against her through your mother and sister immediately before she filed it. Anyways you should file it now. Also go for appeal against such an illegal order. 

Also, file an FIR against her for criminal intimidation threats and violence through your mother.

Firstly, check the pleadings of the DVC, if the case put forth by her is beyond one year, then push for the arguments in the said DVC since complaint pertaining  to more than one year are not maintainable.

Further, wife has no right, title or interest on the In-Laws property, she can seek orders /directions against husband.

Your mother and sister can challenge the same.

File a police complaint against her under 410,406,506IPC.

She will come to a stage of compromise 

This is with reference to the legal query sought. Daughter in law have no right in the in laws property. There is a clear cut law laid down by the Supreme Court of India. The right of daughter in law arises through her husbandhusband.  You mother can file appeal against order passed by court. 

Your mom need to file revision petition before sessions judge that house is owned by her and her daughter in law cannot claim her residential rights on house belong to her.