Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Jagruti K. Thakar, was the original defendant No.1 in a suit filed by her father-in-law, Dhanubhai Thakar (respondent No.1), seeking a mandatory injunction directing her to vacate Flat No.B-8, Mayuri Apartments, Mulund (West), Mumbai, and also to restrain her from entering or residing in another property called Ashirwad. The plaintiff claimed exclusive ownership of the flat, which he had purchased in 1991. His son Ketan married Jagruti on 5.5.1992, and the couple resided in the flat. After the marriage, Jagruti, who held a B.D.S. degree and practiced as a dentist, allegedly started demanding a separate residence. The plaintiff filed the suit for mandatory injunction, which was decreed by the City Civil Court on 24th April 2001, directing Jagruti to remove herself from the flat and restraining her from entering or residing in the flat or Ashirwad. Aggrieved, Jagruti filed the present appeal. The High Court considered the question of whether a daughter-in-law has any right to reside in her father-in-law's self-acquired property after her husband's death. The court noted that the appellant had no independent right of residence under any statute, including the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 or the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 was not in force at the time of the suit and could not be applied retrospectively. The court held that the trial court's decree was correct and dismissed the appeal, confirming the mandatory injunction against the appellant.
Headnote
A) Property Law - Right of Residence - Daughter-in-law's right in father-in-law's self-acquired property - The daughter-in-law, after the death of her husband, has no independent right to reside in the self-acquired property of her father-in-law. The right of residence under the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 or the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 does not extend to a daughter-in-law in respect of her father-in-law's self-acquired property. The trial court's decree for mandatory injunction directing the daughter-in-law to vacate the premises was upheld. (Paras 1-10) B) Civil Procedure - Mandatory Injunction - Suit for eviction of daughter-in-law - The plaintiff, as exclusive owner of the flat, is entitled to seek mandatory injunction for removal of the defendant daughter-in-law who has no right to remain in the property after the death of her husband. The suit is maintainable and the decree is valid. (Paras 3-10) C) Family Law - Maintenance - Right of residence - The daughter-in-law's claim for residence cannot be sustained under any statutory provision. The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 was not in force at the time of the suit and cannot be applied retrospectively. (Paras 8-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the daughter-in-law has any right to reside in the self-acquired property of her father-in-law after the death of her husband, and whether the trial court's decree for mandatory injunction directing her to vacate the premises is sustainable.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed. The judgment and decree of the City Civil Court dated 24th April 2001 is confirmed. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Right of residence of daughter-in-law in father-in-law's self-acquired property
- No independent right after husband's death
- Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act not applicable retrospectively
- Suit for mandatory injunction maintainable
