Skip to main content

In-laws cannot be burdened with liability towards woman: Delhi court

In-laws cannot be burdened with any kind of liability towards a woman, whether directly or indirectly, and all such responsibilities should be of her husband, a Delhi court has said.

The court's observations came on an appeal filed by the father-in-law of a woman, in a domestic violence case, against a trial court order directing him to pay arrears of electricity dues and to continue paying electricity charges for the premises occupied by her.

"In-laws of a wife cannot be burdened directly or indirectly with any liability towards a wife. All such direct liabilities are to be directed against her husband and the estate of the husband," Additional Sessions Judge Pulastya Pramachala said.

The court while setting aside the trial court order to make payment of all subsequent electricity bills in respect of premises occupied by the woman said keeping the legal position in mind it is not sustainable.

"As per law right to residence is not extended, against the self acquired property of in-laws of a wife. This right is to be exercised against husband and against a property, wherein husband of a wife has some sort of right or interest or title, which is referred as shared household," it said.

It said that the trial court shall take care that such burden is not put upon in-laws of respondent (woman) directly or indirectly and directed her to get separate electricity meter in her name and seek reimbursement from her husband.

The court noted that in compliance with the trial court order, father-in-law has already opted to make payment of arrears of electricity bills and the electricity connection was already restored.

While accepting the appeal, the court said that father- in-law of the woman shall not be further burdened with any liability to make payment of subsequent electricity bills.

Delhi resident Ramesh Kumar has filed an appeal against the trial court order on the ground that he has no liability to maintain his daughter-in-law. He contended that even his daughter-in-law had not sought any directions against further payment of electricity dues, still the trial court directed him to make the payment of electricity charges of the premises occupied by her.

However, the woman contested his appeal taking plea that her father-in-law was acting in connivance with her husband.

The woman had claimed that out of maintenance amount of Rs 3500, she cannot make payment of electricity charges and her husband was not making any payment as the electricity meter was installed in his father's name.

Article referred: http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-in-laws-cannot-be-burdened-with-liability-towards-woman-delhi-court-2096754

Comments

Most viewed this month

Valuation Report of Jewellery once made is effective for Four Assessment Years

The division Bench of the Delhi High Court in Pr.Commissioner of Wealth Tax vs. Raghu Hari Dalmia held that a valuation report made by a registered valuer once adopted shall be in effect for four assessment years unless an event has occurred whereby the value is increased or decreased. The High Court made it clear that the event of “search” under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot compel the assessee to undertake a fresh valuation.

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...

Mere Agreement To Sell The Leased Property To Tenant Would Not Terminate Landlord-Tenant Relationship

In CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 1237­1238 OF 2019, Dr. H.K. Sharma vs Shri Ram Lal, the tenant had objected against the eviction suit filed by the landlord, claiming that the landlord-tenant relationship between them had ceased to exist by virtue of an agreement for sale entered between them and that he has already paid some money in advance based on the agreement. The tenant contented as the landlord-tenant relationship did not exist, the landlord cannot evict him. The matter went through various forums and finally landed before the Supreme Court in appeal. The Supreme Court referring to the judgment in Shah Mathuradas Maganlal & Co. vs. Nagappa Shankarappa Malage & Ors., held that in the instant case the lease agreement included no clauses on the fate of the tenancy. A fortiori, the parties did not intend to surrender the tenancy rights despite entering into an agreement of sale of the tenanted property. In other words, if the parties really intended to surrender their tenancy ...