Saturday, September 20, 2014

Supreme Court agrees to examine extent of a daughter-in-law's right of residence in the father-in-law's property

Delhi High Court’s Justice AK Pathak vide judgment dated 25th July 2014 in RFA No.299/2014 titled as ‘Sudha Mishra vs Surya Chandra Mishra’ had ruled that daughter-in-law has no right to continue to occupy the self acquired property of her parents-in-law against their wishes more so when  her husband has no independent right therein nor is living there, as it is not a “shared household” within the meaning of Section 17(1) of The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. Wife is entitled to claim a right in a shared household which means a house belonging to or taken on rent by the husband or the house which belongs to joint family of which husband is a member. Daughter-in-law cannot assert her rights, if any, in the property of her parents-in-law wherein her husband has no right, title or interest. She cannot continue to live in such a house of her parents-in-law against their consent and wishes. The Judge further held that even an adult son or daughter has no legal right to occupy the self acquired property of the parents; against their consent and wishes. A son or daughter if permitted to live in the house occupies the same as a gratuitous licensee and if such license is revoked, he has to vacate the said property.


This decision has been challenged by the daughter-in-law in the Supreme court  in SLP(C) NO. 23519/2014. Supreme Court stayed the execution of the trial court and HC's orders asking the woman to hand over the property, however Court reportedly remarked that it would be better if she lives apart and lets the in-laws live in peace.. The petition came up for hearing before the bench of Justices Madan B Lokur and C Naggappan on 19th September 2014 when SC decided to examine this important issue. With thousands of cases filed under anti-dowry laws and Domestic Violence Prevention Act on this specific issue pending across the country, the fate of the case will be keenly awaited. In its decision, SC is likely to interpret the meaning of a shared household under the domestic violence Act. The next date is 14th October 2014.


Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award compensation of Rs.1.62 crore to a young victim of road accident

A Motor Accident Claims Tribunal headed by Ms. Barkha Gupta, Judge MACT, North West District, Delhi in its important judgment on 9th September 2014 in Case No. 330/2010 titled as ‘Palak Sharma vs Amit Kumar and others’ awarded a compensation of Rs.1.62 crore to the accident victim Palak Sharma, to be paid by Chola Mandalam MS General Insurance Company. On the early morning of March 12,2010, Palak (22 year old boy) was going with his friend on a scooter towards Maharishi Dayanand Park in Keshavpuram here for yoga class, when a rashly driven  Innova car hit him. Due to the impact, Palak and his friend fell down and were taken to a nearby hospital, where the victim was declared 100 per cent paralysed. Palak had cleared his MBA entrance and was working on a salary of Rs. 30,000 per month. 

The tribunal noted that besides being a meritorious student, Palak was financially independent and was ambitious for his higher studies. Court noted that being kept alive by feeding through a pipe and nursing care round the clock, there seems no probability of his recovery as he has suffered from 100 percent permanently disability. He is in a vegetative state and not in a position to look after himself in any manner. One has to keep in mind that the victim has done no wrong and has suffered at the hands of wrongdoer and court must take care to give him/her full and fair compensation for what he/she had suffered. Court ruled that no amount of money can restore the shattered life of the victim.

Click below to read the Full Text of the Judgment.

Download free Android app for latest and important court decisions. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.sgsolicitors.indianlaw&hl=en