daughter's right in parents home after marriage
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 30 April 2011
This query is : Resolved
Hi,
My inlaws home is in karnataka and my wife like to visit them once in a while. My father in law died before our marriage. When she visited, the other unmarried sister get upset and ask my wife to leave the home with reason saying that my wife is married now and married to a different subcast person. And mother in law supports the other daughter. So I wanted to know about daughter's right in her parents home after marriage. Can they ask her to leave ligally. Note that the home is self earned by my mother inlaw. Is the right in dwelling place for woman becomes nil after marriage.
Thanks,
Guru
M.Sheik Mohammed Ali
(Expert) 30 April 2011
if selfearned property can transfer as she wish, so no one cannot ask question.
R.Ramachandran
(Expert) 30 April 2011
Yes. If it is the self-earned property of your mother in law, she can do anything with the property. No one other than your mother in law has any right over the said property, either to live there or to ask for share or to stay etc., especially when the mother in law does not want to permit such visit, stay etc.
For a married daughter, her dwelling place is her matrimonial home.
Uma parameswaran
(Expert) 30 April 2011
she can move a petition under Domestic violence Act.
A V Vishal
(Expert) 30 April 2011
Madam Uma
Can you please cite the relevant section under which she can file a petition under D V Act.
R.Ramachandran
(Expert) 30 April 2011
Dear Mr. Vishal,
I am doubtful whether you would ever get any response from Ms. Uma, to your pointed query.
Uma parameswaran
(Expert) 01 May 2011
see definition of domestic relation ship ,share house hold and section 18.
R.Ramachandran
(Expert) 01 May 2011
Dear Ms. Uma,
Section 2 (s) of the D.V.Act defines the term "shared household" as under:
(s) "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;"
This refers to the house where the woman might have / be living with her husband. This does not refer to her parental house.
Therefore, the question of the lady moving any petition under Domestic violence Act, as suggested by you does not at all arise in the facts and circumstances of the instant case.
Uma parameswaran
(Expert) 02 May 2011
Dear Mr. Ramachandran
Your view is wrong. The Act is to protect the right of women who were victim of violence of any kind occuring within the family.
R.Ramachandran
(Expert) 02 May 2011
Dear Ms. Uma,
Please tell me how my view is wrong.
I fully agree that the D.V. Act is to protect the right of women who are victims of violence of any kind occurring with the family.
What you are telling is the general.
Let us come to specifics.
The original query is, whether the girl can be refused entry into her parental home after her marriage?
In this case, you answered that she should complain under D.V. Act.
The next question posed to you is what section of the D.V. Act is attracted.
You said Section 18 of the D.V.Act.
I pointed out that Sec.18 talks about "shared household" and Sec. 2(s) defines what is the "shared household". As per the definition, the parental house is not covered.
NOW YOU SAY THAT MY VIEW IS WRONG. IF SO, PLEASE EXPLAIN HOW MY VIEW IS WRONG. Simply saying that my view is wrong would not do.
Guest
(Expert) 02 May 2011
Dear Uma,
You first need to understand what is domestic violence and what is property law and differentiate between them for what purposes they are meant for. Besides, you also need to understand the spirit of the question through which solution is sought.
You are just intermingling DV Act and the property law. The woman is not the target of DV in her husband's house, where she lives now. She can also not claim any part of her mother's self possessed property during the life time of her mother and cannot make forced entry unless desired by the property owner. She can be refused entry by her mother in to her home, so far as the proeprty law is concerned.
However, had she been unmarried, her mother's attitude could have come under the ambit of DV. Now after marriage, she cannot claim so. Her husband's house is her house.
In fact you need to interpret both the laws in proper spirit before declaring some one wrong, like you declared Mr. Ramachandran, while he is very correct in his interpretation of the property law, in so far as the question of the author is concerned.
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 02 May 2011
Thank you all, I think I got my answer.
Advocate. Arunagiri
(Expert) 02 May 2011
When it comes the property right, the title holder is having all such rights to allow or not to allow any body, inside that property.
If the girl got married, her dwelling house is that of her husband only, not the parent's.
So, in this case the DV Act is not maintainable. DV Act can not be misused for a property rights from the mother.
Uma parameswaran
(Expert) 02 May 2011
I am thinking ,here the questioner is not asking about the property right. Only asking about the visiting right .That means to see her parents and sisters and to talk to them.That means she needs to continue her relationship. Not asking any property right.
Guest
(Expert) 02 May 2011
Dear Uma,
Clearly you are trying to sidetrack the issue now when you have not been able to stand on your previous views.
If your interpretation, as you expressed in your latest post, is to continue her relationship with her mother and sisters, your own statement on "victim of violence of any kind occuring within the family" proves to be wrong.
Further you have also not quoted the relevant section of the DV Act in support of your previous reply, as desired by Mr. Vishal.
Not only that, if she wants to continue relations with her mother, can she forcibly do that against the wishes of her own mother and sisters?
Had the spirit of the question been to continue to maintain the relations, the author of the question would not have asked for RIGHTS of her wife in the house of her mother after marriage, and would not have sought legal opinion of experts under the caption "Family law." In his question he has clearly asked "about DAUGHTER'S RIGHT in her parents home after marriage."
Rather, instead of asking for the RIGHTS, he would have used some mutually friendly mediator of both the parties, or would have sought the opinion of experts on how to re-establish the spoiled relations with her mother and sisters.
So, your logic is totally wrong.
Uma parameswaran
(Expert) 03 May 2011
Dear PS Dhingra
Question is Daughter's right over parents home after marriage .questioner is not asking about the share of the property.Daughter wants to visit her parent's home.By keeping this in my mind I have given the answer. I am not thinking ,I am not correct.
Any aggrieved female(daughter,Mother, wife, sister,grandmother,mother-In-Law,sister-In- Law ,adopted child,women in relationships of cohabitation) shall be a beneficiary of Domestic violence Act .
R.Ramachandran
(Expert) 03 May 2011
Dear Ms. Uma,
We also agree that "Any aggrieved female(daughter,Mother, wife, sister, grandmother, mother-In-Law,sister-In- Law ,adopted child,women in relationships of cohabitation) shall be a beneficiary of Domestic violence Act."
BUT THE IMPORTANT QUESTION IS HOS IS THE D.V. ACT ATTRACTED IN THE CASE OF THE QUERIST?
If a mother refuses to entertain her daughter from visiting the mother's home, does the mother commit any violence which would attract the provisions of the D.V.Act? That is the precise question, which you are not answering, though initially you advised that the querist "can move a petition under Domestic violence Act."
Advocate. Arunagiri
(Expert) 03 May 2011
Mrs.Uma is still stands in her point. It has to be appreciated, she is not ignoring others comments on her reply.
Keep it up Mrs.Uma.
Okay. Now we will talk about the visiting rights.
Whether the married daughter is having the visiting rights in her mother's self earned house.
Only as the wife she is having the visiting rights in the matrimonial house.
Guest
(Expert) 03 May 2011
Ms. Uma does not seem to know what is the meaning of the terms "RIGHT" of a daughter in parent's home and the "HOME OF A WOMAN AFTER MARRIAGE". Probably, if a woman is not permitted to enter in her flat by a neihbourly woman of the same building, she would treat that also domestic violation. She probably thinks the application of DV Act, as universal in supercession of all other Laws of the land.
If she thinks she is correct in suggesting the remedy and the author of the question also thinks her opinion as correct, I would like to suggest Ms. Uma to take up the said case and sue the mother of the daughter and win the case to get entry of the woman in to that house and start living there, where every one do not like to see her.
She may also like to answer the question raised by Mr. Arnagiri, about visiting rights of a married daughter in her mother's self earned property, and under which law?
If she is right, what is the hesitation for her in citing the relevant section of the law, as already asked by Mr. Vishal?
I wonder, instead of the ways of patch up between the mother and daughter, she advises about the ways to earn more hatred for her from her own real mother and sisters.
Advocate. Arunagiri
(Expert) 03 May 2011
No two wise (wo)men think alike.
It seems that Mrs.Uma is convinced about her opinion. Many of us have different opinion.
So, let us not "Throw down the gauntlet"
Guest
(Expert) 04 May 2011
I wish her all success if she volunteers to take up the case and file a suit in the court of law.
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 04 May 2011
Since there is a confusion about my question, I would like to clarify as below
My question was purely on visiting right rather than aquiring of the mother's self earned property. Now I understood that law will not take care of any human feeling ( in this case law cannot support the feeling that daughter built up since birth which is not dependending on the mother's feeling now).
Just for my curiosity, can you tell me what happens if husband have applied for diverse and wife cannot stay together with husband (again because she is human) and mother don't want to entertain her. and wife cannot take care of her self. will she be suffering till the diverse case resolved ?
Advocate. Arunagiri
(Expert) 04 May 2011
Legally she can not get anything from her mother.
If she maintains relationship with her mother, she may get protection out of love and affection.
If the wife loves her husband, husband wont leave her.
If the daughter loves her parents, her parents wont leave her.
Don't get confused between law and love.
Uma parameswaran
(Expert) 04 May 2011
Dear Mr.Ramachandran ,Mr.Arunagiri ,Mr.PS Dhingra
Thank you for the opportunity given to me to expose my view.
I am also like to give answer to present query. As per my view, she can collect a resident order, against the respondent because.
As per Domestic Violence Act section 3 (a) ,an “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 3(f) “domestic relationship “ means relationship between two persons who live or have, at any point of time ,lived together in a shared house hold ,when they are related by consanguinity ,marriage, or through a relationship in the nature of marriage ,adoption or are family members living together as a joint family.
domestic Violence –sorry .It is elaborate .So see DV Act
R.Ramachandran
(Expert) 04 May 2011
Dear Ms. Uma,
Thanks for the efforts, time and pain taken by you.
We all understand what is the provisions contained in the DV Act.
That is not the issue.
The issue is very simple and straight.
1. The husband and wife are in complete harmony. There is no DV alleged at all.
Rather, this is the query posed by the Husband for and on behalf of his wife.
2. The husband says that he belongs to a different subsect, and therefore the family of his wife have been upset, and the family of his wife (i.e. his mother-in-law and sister-in-law) are not permitting his wife to visit/stay in her mother's place.
3. In the above given facts and situations, the husband wants to know:
(i) Whether a daughter has any right in her parents home after marriage.
(ii)Can his wife's parents (M-I-L and S-I-L) legally ask his wife to leave their house.
(iii) Is the right in dwelling place (mother's place / where she was born and brought up) for woman becomes nil after marriage.
Now my point:
A. Do you agree, that in Section 3(a) the persons concerned are wife, husband, the relatives of husband?
B. Similarly, do you agree, that what is defined in Sec. 3(f) as 'domestic relationship' relates to husband-wife relationship and daughter-in-law - mother-in-law/father-in-law/sister-in-law/brother-in-law relationship and NOT "married daughter/mother/unmarried sister" relationship.
If you agree to points "A" and "B" above, then how does the D.V. Act comes into play, if the mother/sister refuse to accommodated their married daughter/sister in their home?
The married daughter may be aggrieved agaist her mother/sister since they did not allow to reside with them or visit them. BUT DOES THAT ATTRACT THE PROVISIONS OF D.V. Act? That is the precise question.
Advocate. Arunagiri
(Expert) 04 May 2011
The DV Act clearly says that the case can be initiated against the Respondent (S.2q)(male) and his relatives.
Male can be a husband or male partner living in a relationship in the nature of marriage.
S.2 s : Says about the shared household. Once again this also deals about the household of the Respondent - Male only.
So, the Act is very clear, the daughter can not claim initiate against her mother under the DV Act for not allowing her in the house owned by the mother.
Guest
(Expert) 12 May 2011
Dear Uma,
Taking a stand is good, BUT only on right point. Taking a stand on wrong point tends to vindicate the position more of a person the more he or she tries to take a stand and that sometimes harms the reputation of the person insisting on his point
Reading between the lines, particulars the legal provisions is also not good. We are here not to prove some one wrong, but to give correct interpretation, as far as possible. Once you received some adverse opinion on your point, you would better have reviewed the legal position to make your knowledge sound and to make your firm opinion on your point or to resile, as would have been better. Hope you would like to appreciate that we learn from each other only.
Guest
(Expert) 12 May 2011
Dear anonymous,
About your revised query, which you raised on 4th May, the position would have become reverse. Irrespective of whether she would have or not been able to get shelter in her mother's home, if not preferred for divorce, she would have become eligible to take shelter of DV Act against you. But, still, she could not have been able to exert her right on her mother's home against her mother's wishes.
However, when being rejected by you, on account of which she lost the love and affection of her mother, perhaps her mother would have reviewed her earlier decision and would have allowed her to live with her as a matter of affection only.
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 16 May 2011
Hi PS Dhingra,
Forgive me for asking question because of my curiosity but what I wanted to ask was
1. I have applied for divorse based on mutually accepted reason
2. I am perfectly okay for my wife to stay with me even after I apply for divorse
3. My wife cannot stay with me because of human reason ( i think you can imagine her reason for not staying with a husband who will not be husband in few days)
4. neither I can give a separate shelter to my wife till divorse happens nor she can take care of her self.
5. Her parents don't want to give her a shelter
With all these, will my wife has to compromise her feeling and stay with the man who will not be her husband going forward or is there any other way ?
