Elderly Parents Cannot Be Compelled To Let Son & Daughter-In-Law Stay In Their House Against Their Wishes: Bombay High Court

The Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court has recently held that if a son and his wife are permitted by his parents to stay in the house owned by them, it would not confer any right in their favour and they cannot compel the old parents to allow them to reside in the said house, against their (old parents') desire.

Single-judge Justice Prafulla Khubalkar  said if there is some hostile relations between the son and his wife, the wife cannot claim any right to then stay in the house owned by her parents-in-law. 

"It is crucial to note that the suit property is self acquired property of the petitioners (old parents) and the son and daughter-in-law had failed to establish any legal right to reside in that house. Only because son and his wife were allowed by the petitioners to reside in their house, the same cannot be construed to have conferred any right in favour of the daughter-in-law particularly when her relations with the son have turned hostile. In any case, the son and daughter-in-law cannot compel their parents to allow them to reside in their property against their desire," the judge held in the order passed on June 18.

The bench noted that the daughter-in-law had filed divorce proceedings against her husband under the Hindu Marriage Act and also the Domestic Violence Act. She had also filed section 498-A case against her husband and the in-laws.

The court further noted that the petitioner parents had initially filed proceedings against the son and his wife, seeking their eviction. By an order passed on February 18, 2019, a Senior Citizens Tribunal had ordered the son and the daughter-in-law to get out of the house of the parents within 30 days. The daughter-in-law, however, challenged the said order before the Senior Citizens Appellate Tribunal and pointed out that since her divorce proceedings are pending in a Family Court, she cannot be ousted from the matrimonial house. 

The Appellate Tribunal allowed the daughter-in-law's appeal and ordered the parents-in-law to file a civil suit seeking eviction of the son and his wife from the suit property, owned by them. 

Justice Khubalkar, however, rejected the claim and said that there is no legal basis for the daughter-in-law to reside in the petitioners' house and on the contrary the petitioners are entitled to invoke provisions of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 to seek eviction of the son and the daughter-in-law.

"As regards, the contentions of the daughter-in-law based on her right to claim maintenance or right to reside in the property of her husband, the same can be independently enforced by her, if situation so arises. However, under the pretext of enforcing her rights arising out of any matrimonial proceedings as against her husband, she cannot be allowed to defeat the rights of her parents-in-law which are independently protected under the provisions of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007," the judge held. 

As such, the competing rights of the daughter-in-law cannot be compromised at the cost of rights of the senior citizens to enjoy their own property independently, the court underscored.

"Thus, in the peculiar facts of this case, particularly, considering the legal position, directing the petitioners to initiate fresh civil proceedings for eviction of their daughter-in-law would be detrimental and would defeat the purpose of the enactment. In the light of the factual and legal opinion I am of the firm view that the Appellate Tribunal has grossly erred in allowing the appeal and directing the parties to approach civil court for seeking eviction," the judge said. 

While disposing of the plea, Justice Khubalkar made it clear that both the Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal are statutory authorities constituted under this special enactment and are vested with the jurisdiction to adjudicate disputes concerning senior citizens.

"It is, therefore, incumbent upon the presiding officers of these forums to remain mindful of the objectives and legislative intent underlying the special statute. Moreover, they are duty-bound to acquaint themselves with the prevailing legal position, including the authoritative pronouncements of the Supreme Court and the High Courts interpreting the provisions of this legislation, and to apply the same judiciously while deciding cases," the bench underlined. 

It is thus evident that the Appellate Tribunal has adopted an unduly hyper-technical approach, thereby defeating the very object and purpose of the special statute, which is in the nature of beneficial legislation enacted to safeguard the rights and interests of senior citizens. Although vested with statutory powers under the said enactment, the Appellate Tribunal has displayed an indifferent attitude towards the issues raised by the senior citizens. In such circumstances, the impugned order is wholly unsustainable in law and deserves to be set aside, Justice Khubalkar held. 

With these observations, the judge quashed and set aside the August 7, 2020 order passed by the Appellate Tribunal and upheld the Tribunal's order passed on February 18, 2019 and ordered the son and daughter-in-law to get out of the parent's house within 30 days. 

Appearance: 

Advocates NS Jaju and PP Patni appeared for the Parents. 

Assistant Government Pleader ML Sangit represented the State. 

Case Title: Chandiram Anandram Hemnani vs Senior Citizens Appellate Tribunal (Writ Petition 7794 of 2020)

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment