AMBIKA JAIN Vs. RAM PRAKASH SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The daughter-in-law or the mother-in-law/father-in-law, who is right or whose right should prevail over the right of the other: is a dilemma which husbands all over the world have been facing since time immemorial; today in this batch of appeals under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ('CPC' for short), this Court is faced with the same question. The appellants herein are daughters-in-law who, with their husbands and children, have been residing in the premises which, as on date, are owned by the respondents, who are their mothers-in-law, fathers- in-law or both, as the case may be (hereinafter referred to as 'in-laws'). In each of these appeals, the appellant/daughter-in-law is aggrieved by the decree of possession passed under Order XII Rule 6 CPC by the trial Court in favour of her in-laws, upon an admission made by her regarding their title over the suit premises. While the daughter-in-law claims that she has a statutory right to reside in the suit premises which may be in the name of her in-laws, as it is her shared household under Section 2(s) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 ('DV Act' for short), irrespective of whether it is a joint family property or not, the claim of the in-laws is that the suit premises is not a shared household and therefore the appellant/daughters-in-law have no right, under the DV Act, to reside therein. The alternative submissions of the respondents is that in any event the right of residence, if any, available to the appellant under the D.V. Act, being transient in nature, cannot stand in the way of the true owner from seeking possession in accordance with the procedure established by law, i.e., by instituting a suit for title, possession and eviction before a civil court on the basis of the title documents in their favour.

(2.) As all these appeals are arising out of similar facts and raise identical issues, they are being decided by this common judgment. For the sake of convenience, this judgment refers to the competent court under the DV Act in all these appeals as 'the DV Court'. Facts

(3.) Before delving into the issues arising in the appeals, it would be apposite to briefly note the factual matrix of each case: