Daughter in law threatening her in laws to dis-possess from their own property - mother in law filed suit against her alongwith an application for interim injunction u/s. 151 and Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 - plaintiff-mother in law contended that she is the owner of the suit property on the strength of registered sale deed - trial court refused to grant interim injunction observing that the house is a shared house under the Domestic Violence Act and the daughter in law cannot be forcibly evicted from the same as her belongings are still lying there - appeal by district court allowed - daughter in law prefered revision against order passed in appeal - revision dismissed.
While relying upon S.R. Batra and another vs Smt. Taruna Batra, 2007(1) RCR (Criminal) 403 in Suman vs Tulsi Ram 2015(1) RCR (Civil) 304, it was held that daughter-in-law does not have any right of protection under Section 17 of the Act for the purpose of living in the house belonging to parents-in-law which is exclusively owned by them.
.........…...............
For the reasons recorded hereinabove, I find that the petitioner has no right of residence in the house in question under Section 17 of the Act for the purpose of living in the self- acquired property of the plaintiff-respondent.
In view of above, I do not find any justification to differ with the order dated 06.08.2020 passed by Additional District Judge, Sonipat.
This revision petition is accordingly, dismissed.
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Swati
Vs.
Shakuntala
Decided on 24/09/2020