KULDEEP KAUR Vs. SWARAN KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Appeal under Sec. 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 assails the correctness of Order dtd. 22/3/2024 [hereinafter referred to as "Impugned Order"] passed by the learned Family Court [hereinafter referred to as the "Family Court"], whereby the suit for possession, damages/ use and occupation charges, permanent as well as mandatory injunction filed by the Respondent, was decreed in her favour.

(2.) The brief facts leading to the present Appeal, as pleaded, are that the Appellant and the Respondent share a matrimonial and familial relationship. The Appellant is the daughter-in-law of the Respondent (Plaintiff before Family Court). The Respondent's son, Mr. Nanak Mehta, married the Appellant on 13/4/1999 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. Out of the said wedlock, a male child was born on 7/2/2000. The Respondent passed away on 14/5/2016, leaving behind two legal heirs, i.e., one daughter, Ms. Pratibha Chadda and one son, Mr. Nanak Mehta, both of whom were brought on record as her legal representatives. It is relevant to note that the Respondent had executed a Will in favour of her daughter, Ms. Pratibha Chadda, who now represents her estate in the present proceedings.

(3.) The case of the Appellant, before the Family Court, was that she had been residing at property bearing No. D-2/217, Sector-11, Rohini, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the "suit property"], since her marriage in 1999 and continued to reside there as it constituted her matrimonial home. She claimed that the suit property was initially purchased in the name of her husband, Mr. Nanak Mehta, and was subsequently transferred to his mother, the Respondent, not voluntarily, but under duress, given the strained relationship between the Appellant and the Respondent. The Appellant alleged that since the inception of her marriage, she had been subjected to acts of cruelty, both mental and physical at the hands of her husband, Mr. Nanak Mehta, as well as by her in-laws.