Courts Update SC orders old man's son, daughter-in-law out of house

SC orders old man’s son, daughter-in-law out of house


New Delhi, May 28 (ILNS): The Supreme Court has allowed a woman till July 31 to vacate the premises of her father-in-law on the strength of provisions provided in the Senior Citizens Act.

One Daulat Ram’s son had contested (through his wife Jyotsana Pawar) his father’s demand for vacation of the premises of his son and daughter in-law, and despite a partition suit on in the High Court, the top court maintained that this particular issue needs to be handled first.

The order was passed by the Division Bench of Justices BR Gavai and Surya Kant. The Bench also said that a join undertaking has to be submitted by both parties, and in default, contempt will be issued.

The Court had earlier asked the petitioner’s lawyer, Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra, to consider three months time to vacate the property of Daulat Ram Pawar. The Bench also observed that the litigation was actually at the behest of the elder son of Daulat Ram.

Senior Advocate Ranjit Sinha, Daulat Ram Pawar’s Counsel, submitted that a civil suit has been filed related to the disputed property and a partition suit is pending in the High Court, wherein certain remarks have been passed by the High Court, which might affect the merits of the case.

The amendment of the Domestic Violence Act in 2016 was brought to the picture in the context, but that did not deter the top court from passing the verdict. Earlier, the Delhi High Court had also dismissed Jyotsna’s appeal and this was a challenge of that order. The single Judge at the High Court had ordered that Jyotsna and her husband should vacate the premises in six months.

Daulat Ram had filed an eviction petition against his son under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. This petition was rejected by the District Magistrate and Daulat Ram had then moved the Appellate Court, which had ordered the son and his wife to vacate the premises in 15 days.

At that time, a statement was recorded before the Court by the son of Daulat Ram that he will vacate and hand over the possession of first floor on or before the expiration of six months. Meanwhile, a partition suit was filed before the Delhi High Court (Nandita Pawar and ors v Daulat Ram Pawar and ors), seeking partition of entire property – ground floor, First Floor, Second Floor, Third Floor, and Top Floor.

The son had challenged the Appellate Court order in the High Court. The Delhi High Court had pointed out that Jyotsana and others have taken the benefit of two extensions of six months and it was clear that the property in question did not belong to the son of Daulat Pawar and secondly, the Domestic Violence Act application was filed late. ILNS\KY\SJ\RJ


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Latest news

Delhi High Court issues notice to Centre, Defence Ministry on plea challenging curbs on strike by defence personnel

New Delhi Sept 16 (ILNS) The Delhi High Court on Thursday sought response from the Centre and...

Allahabad High Court directs shifting of monkeys to forest within three months for creating upheaval in Varanasi city

Allahabad Sept 16 (ILNS) The Allahabad High Court has directed to shift the monkeys who created upheaval in Varanasi city,...

Madhya Pradesh High Court disposes of PIL seeking legal action against illegal medical practitioners in Shahdol district

Bhopal Sept 16 (ILNS) The Madhya Pradesh High Court has disposed of a PIL seeking legal action...

CJI Ramana hauls up Centre over forced retirement of NCLAT chairperson

New Delhi Sept 16 (ILNS) Chief Justice of India N.V. Ramana on Thursday came down heavily on...

Delhi High Court directs UIDAI, RBI, Google India Digital Services Private Ltd to respond to PIL alleging unauthorised storage of Aadhaar, banking information by...

New Delhi Sept 16 (ILNS) The Delhi High Court asked the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI), RBI...

Supreme Court refuses PILs on Covid-19 measures due to delay in their listing

New Delhi Sept 16 The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to entertain two PILs seeking directions to...

Must read

You might also likeRELATED
Recommended to you