News By/Courtesy: Parimala Ronanki | 30 Mar 2021 12:29pm IST

HIGHLIGHTS

  • pronouncement of safeguarding rights of the women enmesh in a matrimonial dispute under the provision of matrimonial dispute.
  • rights entitled for daughter in law.
  • overruling of an important judgement of S.R. Batra v. Taruna Batra

In the case of Satish Chander Ahuja v. Sneha Ahuja it happened is that they got married and started living together in their father’s house in the year 1995. The problem in the marriage starts in the year July 2014 and thereafter the husband started to live separately in the same house. On 28th November husband files a divorce petition under cruelty. But the petition regarding this issue is still pending. After 1 year the wife files a case under the name of domestic violence on her husband and her in-laws. The chief metro polytan magistrate in November in 2016 passed an interim order on restraining the respondents from alienating the property and later now the Satish Ahuja that is the father-in-law who is a 76-year-old man filled a suit for mandatory and permanent injunction and also, he prays for his daughter in law to leave the premises so that he can live peacefully with his old wife. And states that she does not have the right against the property as her husband is still alive and she is just like a tenant living in the house, he stated. And in 2018 Satish Ahuja applies to order 12 rule 6 for passing a degree on the admission made by the Sneha in section 12 of the domestic violence act. The trial court decreased the suit as she was categorically admitted by her and the court tells her to leave the premises of the house. The issue that reaches the high court is whether the suit could simply be decreed by the trial court based on the title without weighing the effect of the statutory right in the favour of daughter law. The high court said the trial court erroneously passed the decree of her living the house under order 12 rule 6. The high court said the trial court to look into the case so that they do not make any unambiguous decision. The high court consistently restrained from determining the question of whether the said household is a shared household or not. Now the case travels to the supreme court by an appeal filed by the father-in-law. Then after all the study, the supreme court has appointed three judges’ bench which comprises of justice Ashok Bhushan, Justice R. Subhash Reddy, Mr. Shah. These three judges’, the bench has said that any house that belongs to the relatives of the husband where they are involved in a domestic relationship and the condition that is mentioned in section 2(s) of protection of women from domestic violence act, are satisfied and the said house will become a shared household, in that case, the wife can claim right. She has the prerogative to stay in the house of their in-laws if she is the hound of domestic violence. The supreme court held a crucial judgment overruling the 2006 judgment in S.R. Batra v. Taruna Batra which was of a similar case. In the case S.R. Batra v. Taruna Batra the supreme court has appointed two judges’ bench which comprises Justice SB Sinha and Justice M. Katju. This bench has said that the wife can only claim a right to residence if it is a shared household. A shared household means a household which is either belongs to the husband or the house that is taken on rent by the husband or any household of the joint family and the husband is a member in that joint family. So, the wife can claim right only under this shared household but as the court said she does not have the right to claim right a right of residence in the in-law’s house.

 

This Article Does Not Intend To Hurt The Sentiments Of Any Individual Community, Sect, Or Religion Etcetera. This Article Is Based Purely On The Authors Personal Views And Opinions In The Exercise Of The Fundamental Right Guaranteed Under Article 19(1)(A) And Other Related Laws Being Force In India, For The Time Being. Further, despite all efforts that have been made to ensure the accuracy and correctness of the information published, 5thVoice.News shall not be responsible for any errors caused due to human error or otherwise.

Section Editor: 5thVoice.News | 30 Mar 2021 15:48pm IST


Tags : # rights #verdict of safe guarding rights of women

Latest News







Copyright Kalyan Krishna MediaZ Private Limited. All rights reserved. Unless otherwise indicated, all materials on these pages are copyrighted by Kalyan Krishna MediaZ Private Limited. All rights reserved. No part of these pages, either text or image may be used for any purpose. By continuing past this page, you agree to our Terms of Service, Cookie Policy, Privacy Policy and Content Policies.