Court dismisses appeal, affirms that rights under Domestic Violence Act do not extend to sister-in-law's property.
In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has dismissed an appeal by Shalu, who sought to assert her right to reside in her sister-in-law Meera Batra's property as her matrimonial home. The court reaffirmed the lower courts' decisions, which upheld the plaintiff's ownership rights and ordered the eviction of Shalu, who had no lawful claim to the property.
The case revolved around a dispute over a property in Ramesh Nagar, New Delhi, originally owned by the plaintiff's mother, Smt. Maya Devi. The property was bequeathed to Meera Batra through a will, making her the exclusive owner after her mother's demise. Shalu, married to Meera's brother Munish Kumar Lakhina, resided in the property with her husband as a licensee.
Upon marital discord, Munish vacated the property, but Shalu continued to reside there, claiming it as her matrimonial home. The plaintiff filed a suit for mandatory and permanent injunction, seeking possession of the property and preventing the creation of third-party interests. The trial court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, establishing that Shalu had no domestic relationship with the plaintiff and thus could not claim the property as a shared household under the Domestic Violence Act.
The appellate court upheld this decision, noting that Shalu's remedy lay against her husband under the Domestic Violence Act, not against the rightful property owner. The High Court emphasized that the plaintiff had permitted her brother to reside on the property as a licensee, and upon withdrawal of this permission, Shalu's status was reduced to that of a trespasser.
The judgment underscored that reliefs under the Domestic Violence Act could be granted in civil proceedings, but in this case, no such protection was warranted. The court found no substantial question of law in the appeal, dismissing it on merits.
This decision reinforces property rights and clarifies the scope of protection under the Domestic Violence Act, particularly in cases involving extended family members and property disputes.
Bottom line:-
A licensee who has been permitted to reside in a property cannot assert ownership or possession rights once the permission is withdrawn, and the property owner seeks possession.
Statutory provision(s):
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Section 100, Domestic Violence Act, 2005 Section 26
