Delhi High Court Upholds Eviction of Daughter-in-Law, Mandates Alternate Accommodation

Court Balances Rights of Senior Citizens and Statutory Protections under Domestic Violence Act 

In a significant judgment, the Delhi High Court has directed Sonia Mehra, the appellant and daughter-in-law, to vacate her in-laws' property, citing the need to balance her statutory right of residence under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (PWDV Act) with the rights of her senior citizen in-laws to peaceful enjoyment of their property. The court mandated that Sonia Mehra be provided with an alternate accommodation, with all expenses covered by her in-laws, to safeguard her rights and those of her minor children. 

The decision, delivered by a division bench consisting of Mr. Anil Kshetarpal and Mr. Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, J.J., emphasized that the statutory right under Section 17 of the PWDV Act does not entitle a daughter-in-law to reside indefinitely in premises owned exclusively by her in-laws, especially when such residence is detrimental to their health and well-being. 

The case involved a dispute between Sonia Mehra and her in-laws, Romy Mehra and others, who sought her eviction from their property, citing a toxic environment exacerbated by continued acrimony. The court-appointed counselor's report highlighted the negative impact on the family's dynamics, including the deteriorating health of Romy Mehra, who suffers from Parkinson's disease. 

The court balanced the competing rights by directing the in-laws to provide a rented accommodation with a monthly rent of Rs. 2,50,000, along with all ancillary costs, ensuring that Sonia Mehra and her children are not rendered homeless or financially insecure. The court noted that the alternate arrangement preserves the welfare of the minor children and addresses the statutory protections afforded to the appellant under the PWDV Act. 

The judgment also referenced the principles laid out in the Dorab Cawasji Warden case, justifying the interim mandatory injunction for eviction due to exceptional circumstances. The court underscored the importance of maintaining a peaceful environment for senior citizens while ensuring the appellant's rights are adequately protected. 

The decision reinforces the legal precedent that while statutory protections exist for women under the PWDV Act, they must be balanced against the rights of property owners, particularly senior citizens, to live peacefully and with dignity in their own homes. 

Bottom Line:

Protection under Section 17 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, does not grant an indefeasible right of residence in property owned exclusively by in-laws. Adequate alternate accommodation ensures compliance with statutory protections while balancing the rights of senior citizens to peaceful possession of their property.

Statutory provision(s): Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, Sections 17, 19(1)(f); Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Order XXXIX Rules 1 & 2.

Sonia Mehra v. Romy Mehra, (Delhi)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2819361