• Home
  • About
  • Our Aim
  • Team
  • Photos
  • We Contribute
  • Online Appointment
  • Donate Us
  • FAQs
  • Contact
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Our Aim
  • Team
  • Photos
  • We Contribute
  • Online Appointment
  • Donate Us
  • FAQs
  • Contact
Search
Close
Home Judgement

महिला अपने ससुर की संपत्ति पर अधिकार का दावा नहीं कर सकती: पंजाब और हरियाणा उच्च न्यायालय

Adv. Dilip Kumar by Adv. Dilip Kumar
July 19, 2020
in Judgement
0
अपराध कार्य  में  मोबाइल नंबर का उपयोग किया जाता है, तो पहली दायित्व  Mobile Owner  की है: P & H HC
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn
  • WhatsApp

“शादी के दौरान, विवाहित पत्नी के भरणं-पोषण का व्यक्तिगत दायित्व पति का है। इस तरह के दायित्व को पूरा करने की जवाबदेही पति की है। ससुर की स्वअर्जित संपत्ति से भरण-पोषण का अधिकार पत्नी को नहीं है, ससुर की स्वअर्जित संपत्ति भरण-पोषण के लिए जप्त नहीं किया जा सकता है।”

RSA No.4398/2016 (O&M)
Varinder Kaur Vs Jitender Kumar and others.

The court relied on several judgments and dismissed an appeal by a woman claiming residential rights on her matrimonial house, owned by her father-in-law.

Justice Raj Mohan Singh upheld the judgment of the lower appellate court and held, ‘Given above and in the light of aforementioned judicial pronouncements, it can be safely culled out that the appellant has no right to live in the self-acquired property of the plaintiff/ respondent No.1. The lower appellate court has rightly passed the impugned judgment and decree against the appellant.’Relying on apex court judgments, the court observed,

“During the subsistence of the marriage, maintenance of a married wife is a personal obligation on the part of the husband. Such an obligation can be met from the properties of the husband out of joint properties. The properties shown exclusively in the name of parents cannot be a subject matter of any attachment or enforcement of any right of maintenance.”

The property in question belongs to one Jitender Kumar, a retd. Naval officer and father-in-law of the petitioner.

He filed a case against his daughter-in-law and son seeking vacation of the first floor of his house. As per case details, a marital discord erupted between the couple, and after several intervening circumstances and followed by a compromise, the daughter-in-law e moved back in after the birth of her daughter. However, things turned sour again and the father-in-law moved the court seeking their eviction. The court in November 2015 had directed that the house be vacated within two months and was restrained from sub-letting the house in question.

The son, however, held that he had already moved out of the said household and was putting up in rented accommodation. The wife, on the other hand, continued to stay there and contested that they were members of a joint Hindu family and had a right over her matrimonial home where she was putting up since marriage and also gave birth to her daughter.

The court dismissed the petition and observed that in statutes like the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, the maintenance of wife is the personal obligation of the husband and cannot be satisfied from the self-acquired property of the parents of the husband.

For details judgement kindly click the link:-

https://www.phhc.gov.in/enq_caseno.php?var1=RSA&var2=4398&var3=2016

Adv. Dilip Kumar

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn
  • WhatsApp
Previous Post

जमानत का अंतिम कोर्ट सेशन कोर्ट हो तभी ………….

Next Post

सिविल वाद के त्वरित निष्पादन हेतु कारगर उपाय।

Adv. Dilip Kumar

Adv. Dilip Kumar

Next Post
सिविल वाद के त्वरित निष्पादन हेतु कारगर उपाय।

सिविल वाद के त्वरित निष्पादन हेतु कारगर उपाय।

Discussion about this post

Cases Resolved by the DE

Full-Stop No. 18/2025 (Family-Dispute)

Full-Stop No. 18/2025 (Family-Dispute)

by Adv. Dilip Kumar
May 6, 2025
0

Dispute-Eater Run & managed by Ram Yatan Sharma Memorial Trust...

Full Stop No. 17/2025 (Property – Dispute)

Full Stop No. 17/2025 (Property – Dispute)

by Adv. Dilip Kumar
April 11, 2025
0

Dispute-Eater Run and managed by Ram Yatan Sharma Memorial Trust...

Full-Stop No. 16/2025 (Family-Dispute)

Full-Stop No. 16/2025 (Family-Dispute)

by Adv. Dilip Kumar
April 3, 2025
0

Dispute-Eater Run & managed by Ram Yatan Sharma Memorial Trust...

Load More

Latest Articles on DE

Important Documents for Partition Suit.

Important Documents for Partition Suit.

by Adv. Dilip Kumar
June 7, 2025
0

Certified Copy of Survey Khatiyan. (Title deeds like Sale Deeds,...

“बेटी से बहू तक की यात्रा”

“बेटी से बहू तक की यात्रा”

by Adv. Dilip Kumar
May 24, 2025
0

शादी के कुछ ही दोनों बाद विवाद हो गया। कारण...

कैमरे के फ़्लैश में धुंधले होते वैवाहिक संस्कार।

कैमरे के फ़्लैश में धुंधले होते वैवाहिक संस्कार।

by Adv. Dilip Kumar
April 21, 2025
0

"कैमरे के फ़्लैश में धुंधले होते वैवाहिक संस्कार" भारत में...

Judgement from the Court

संयुक्त वसीयत की स्थिति में वसीयत का प्रावधान केवल मृतक वसीयतकर्ता की संपत्ति तक ही सीमित होगा जीवित वसीयतकर्ता की संपत्ति पर प्रभावी नहीं होगा-  केरल उच्च न्यायालय।

संयुक्त वसीयत की स्थिति में वसीयत का प्रावधान केवल मृतक वसीयतकर्ता की संपत्ति तक ही सीमित होगा जीवित वसीयतकर्ता की संपत्ति पर प्रभावी नहीं होगा-  केरल उच्च न्यायालय।

January 7, 2023
बहू को है सास-ससुर के घर में रहने का अधिकार – सुप्रीम कोर्ट का ऐतिहासिक फैसला,  

बहू को है सास-ससुर के घर में रहने का अधिकार – सुप्रीम कोर्ट का ऐतिहासिक फैसला,  

September 19, 2022
नोटरी विवाह/तलाक दस्तावेजों को निष्पादित करने के लिए अधिकृत नहीं हैं: – MP HC

नोटरी विवाह/तलाक दस्तावेजों को निष्पादित करने के लिए अधिकृत नहीं हैं: – MP HC

November 24, 2021
Load More
  • Home
  • About
  • Our Aim
  • Team
  • Photos
  • We Contribute
  • Online Appointment
  • Donate Us
  • FAQs
  • Contact
  • Home
  • About
  • Our Aim
  • Team
  • Photos
  • We Contribute
  • Online Appointment
  • Donate Us
  • FAQs
  • Contact
Facebook Twitter Youtube Linkedin
© 2019-2022 – Dispute Eater

Run & Managed by – RAM YATAN SHARMA MEMORIAL TRUST®

made with love at Ambit Solutions (7488039982)
WhatsApp chat