wife not vacating from her father-in-laws house
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 11 November 2009
This query is : Resolved
im working abroad. i got real problems with my wife and have decided to get divorce. here are the highlights:
1. she lodged a case at the local police station on grounds of dowry torture.
2. I got anticipatory bail
3. I filed a petition for divorce on grounds of cruelty
3. She is currently staying at my fathers house (bought by him on his name)
4. She would not vacate the house
5. We received a court order - it says we should not interrupt her stay there
Now my question is this: is my father going to lose his property?
We've been married over the past 2 and a half years. She has been staying at my fathers house for the past one year. we got a child too. We are christians.
thank you
Adv Archana Deshmukh
(Expert) 11 November 2009
Your father will not lose the house. Your wife do not have any right over the property of her father-in-law though she is staying in that house.
R.R. KRISHNAA
(Expert) 11 November 2009
Legally a wife cannot claim right of residence in her mother in law or father in law's house. The order of the court not to interrupt her stay in house is wrong.
Manish Singh
(Expert) 11 November 2009
i might be going a bit away from the main query herein but as our expert said, the court orders are wrong can not be maintained since the property is in husband's name thus she is entitled to stay in there being it the matrimonial home. also, if husband is not alive, the in laws become liable to maintain the daughter in law.
but it should be noted that these provisions relate to hindus so we must look upon the fact whether the same applies to christians too or not. ill provide the said information soon.
Sachin Bhatia
(Expert) 11 November 2009
Your wife cannot claim right of residence in her father in law's house. Your father will not lose the house.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 11 November 2009
Until and unless decree of divorce is finalised, she has got every right to stay in the ordinary residential house of her husband, may it be registered in the name of her father in law. As the matter of divorce is still pending before the courts, no comments can be passed except that the father in law is not going to lose his property and it is intact and shall remain as such.
A V Vishal
(Expert) 11 November 2009
Basically, it should be looked under what provisions of law the case is charged, if the court has ordered that the right to residence should not be interrupted then it could be under the provisions of DV Act.
"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;
S.17. Right to reside in a shared household.-
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, every woman in a domestic relationship shall have the right to reside in the shared household, whether or not she has any right, title or beneficial interest in the same.
(2) The aggrieved person shall not be evicted or excluded from the shared household or any part of it by the respondent save in accordance with the procedure established by law.
S.19. Residence orders.-
(1) While disposing of an application under sub-section (1) of section 12, the Magistrate may, on being satisfied that domestic violence has taken place, pass a residence order -
(a) restraining the respondent from dispossessing or in any other manner disturbing the possession of the aggrieved person from the shared household, whether or not the respondent has a legal or equitable interest in the shared household;
(b) directing the respondent to remove himself from the shared household;
(c) restraining the respondent or any of his relatives from entering any portion of the shared household in which the aggrieved person resides;
(d) restraining the respondent from alienating or disposing off the shared household or encumbering the same;
(e) restraining the respondent from renouncing his rights in the shared household except with the leave of the Magistrate; or
(f) directing the respondent to secure same level of alternate accommodation for the aggrieved person as enjoyed by her in the shared household or to pay rent for the same, if the circumstances so require:Provided that no order under clause (b) shall be passed against any person who is a woman.
(2) The Magistrate may impose any additional conditions or pass any other direction which he may deem reasonably necessary to protect or to provide for the safety of the aggrieved person or any child of such aggrieved person.
(3) The Magistrate may require from the respondent to execute a bond, with or without sureties, for preventing the commission of domestic violence.
(4) An order under sub-section (3) shall be deemed to be an order under Chapter VIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) and shall be dealt with accordingly.
(5) While passing an order under sub-section (1), sub-section (2) or sub-section (3), the court may also pass an order directing the officer in charge of the nearest police station to give protection to the aggrieved person or to assist her or the person making an application on her behalf in the implementation of the order.
(6) While making an order under sub-section (1), the Magistrate may impose on the respondent obligations relating to the discharge of rent and other payments, having regard to the financial needs and resources of the parties.
(7) The Magistrate may direct the officer in-charge of the police station in whose jurisdiction the Magistrate has been approached to assist in the implementation of the protection order.(8) The Magistrate may direct the respondent to return to the possession of the aggrieved person her stridhan or any other property or valuable security to which she is entitled to.
