The Kerala High Court in its order dated August 21, 2023 held that a woman who has been divorced cannot ‘cling on’ to the matrimonial home claiming it to be shared household.
The woman had tried to supersede the Civil Court that had ordered her eviction from the matrimonial home.
READ ORDER | Wife Has No Right To Forcefully Take Streedhan From Mother-in-Law’s House; Delhi Court Orders FIR
Case:
Parties got married in the year 1994. The couple lived in the same property that belonged to the husband’s family. The residence building was in the name of husband’s late mother and after her death, the respondent husband got the possession of the building.
Due to matrimonial disputes, they got separated and the marriage was dissolved legally in December 2015.
However, the woman refused to leave the property, claiming her property right in the shared matrimonial household. The dispute is between the appellant divorced wife and the respondent husband and his family.
READ ORDER | Daughter-in-Law Cannot Demand Eviction Of In-laws From Property While Claiming Her Right To Shared Matrimonial Household: Delhi High Court
Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram
According to the order passed by the Family Court, the appellant had no right, title or interest over that property as the marriage between the appellant and respondent has been dissolved as early as in 2015.
Kerala High Court
A bench of Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Sophy Thomas heard the matter and upheld the Family Court order. The bench stated:
She has no case that, she is having any title or ownership over that property. So, we are in full agreement with the finding of the Family Court that, she is liable to be evicted from the petition schedule building.
Adding further, the bench remarked:
By the impugned judgment, the Family Court ordered eviction of the appellant from the petition schedule building in accordance with the procedure established by law, and her claim for residence in that building, as a shared household cannot supersede the decree for eviction granted by a competent civil court.
In any view of the matter, the appellant has no right to reside in the petition schedule building and so, she is bound to vacate that building forthwith.
READ ORDER | Mother-in-Law Being Owner Of Property, Can Evict Troublesome Daughter-in-Law From Shared Matrimonial Household: Delhi High Court
The High Court also took note of the various domestic violence cases filed by the wife against her husband – all of them were dismissed and no charges against the husband had been proven. The Court infact stated that it was the appellant wife who was trying to continue in possession of the building and refusing to accept alternate offers of accommodation provided by the responded husband.
Accordingly, the Kerala High Court did not find any wrong with the lower Court order and dismissed the appeal filed by the ex-wife. The High Court ordered:
In the result, the appeal fails and hence dismissed.
The appellant is directed to vacate the petition schedule building forthwith and in default, the 2nd respondent, who is the owner of that building, can approach the Family Court, and in that event, the Family Court has to see that the 2nd respondent is put in possession of the petition schedule building, without further delay.
DO WATCH:
Should Daughter-in-Law Be Allowed In Matrimonial Home After Domestic Violence Against In-Laws?
LEAVE YOUR COMMENTS BELOW:
READ ORDER | Ex-Wife Cannot Claim Right To Shared Matrimonial Household: Kerala High Court
— Voice For Men India (@voiceformenind) September 7, 2023
▪️1994: Marriage
▪️2015: Divorce
▪️All DV cases filed by wife dismissed, no allegations proven
▪️Ex-wife refused alternate accomodation offered by husbandhttps://t.co/aBcgzp7Of0
Join our Facebook Group or follow us on social media by clicking on the icons below
If you find value in our work, you may choose to donate to Voice For Men Foundation via Milaap OR via UPI: voiceformenindia@hdfcbank (80G tax exemption applicable)
Follow Us
