Telangana High Court
Smt. Yallapragada Gowri Naga Mounika vs Yallapragada Srinivas Sri Krishna on 3 February, 2023
Author: P.Naveen Rao
Bench: P.Naveen Rao
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.10 of 2023
Date: 03.02.2023
Between:
Smt. Yallapragada Gowri Naga Mounika,
W/o. Y.Srinivas Sri Krishna, Aged about 26 yrs.,
Occu: Housewife, r/o.H.No.1-10-1/A,
Street No.5, Near Andhra Bank, Ashok Nagar,
Hyderabad.
.... Petitioner/respondent/
Respondent
And
Yallapragada Srinivas Sri Krishna,
s/o.Yallapragada S.Badrinath,
Aged about 32 years, occu: Employee,
r/o.H.No.1-10-1/A, Street No.5,
Near Andhra Bank, Ashok Nagar,
Hyderabad.
... Respondent/petitioner/
Petitioner
This Court made the following:
PNR,J
CRP No.10 of 2023
2
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO
CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.10 of 2023
ORDER:
Marriage between petitioner and respondent was solemnized on 10.03.2019. Alleging that marriage was not consummated, that petitioner subjected the respondent to mental and physical cruelty during the period of stay in the house of respondent's parents and they have not been living together for a long time respondent filed O.P.No.286 of 2022 in I-Additional Family Court at Hyderabad.
2. In the said O.P., respondent filed I.A.No.568 of 2022 under Section 7 of the Family Courts Act,1984 (for brevity hereinafter referred to as the 'Act 1984') praying to pass an order of eviction of petitioner from the respondent parents' house.
3. The case of the respondent is that on 24.12.2021 the petitioner and her family members came to his parents' house and created galata and ruckus in the house and in the neighbourhood, abused his parents in the vulgar language. They have also threatened parents and himself with dire consequences and would grab their properties. Again on PNR,J CRP No.10 of 2023 3 25.02.2022 petitioner and her mother picked a fight with his parents in a most heinous and derogatory manner. Father of respondent fell ill and was hospitalized due to trauma. It is his further case that the petitioner has been staying in the guest bed room of the house from 24.12.2021 and her parents frequently visited and stayed with her.
4. It is his further case that having come to know that respondent's mother became seriously ill in Bangalore and parents wanted to go to Bangalore, they requested petitioner to go to their relatives house during their absence, so that house can be locked. On this, petitioner created lot of ruckus, called media people and illegally broke open the house. Having come to know, parents had to return from Bangalore without spending time with grandmother who died later and his mother could not attend to last rites of her mother.
5. It is also his case that though his parents are senior citizens they could not get police protection and protection under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (for brevity the Act 2007'). Under fear of harassment and humiliation parents left their own house and are now living in a hotel. He also contended that he is not living PNR,J CRP No.10 of 2023 4 with his parents. According to him parents are made to suffer for no fault of them and unless petitioner is evicted from parents' house grave hardship would be caused to them.
6. According to petitioner, she is living in a shared household and entitled to live there. She filed DVC.No.138 of 2022 in the Court of III Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. The parents tried to evict the petitioner under the guise of an order under the Act, 2007 but she filed W.P.No.29975 of 2022 wherein this Court directed police not to evict her from the shared house and said order is confirmed in W.A.No.551 of 2022.
7. According to her, all matrimonial rituals were performed in the said house and she has been living in the house ever since her marriage and she cannot be thrown out. She made several counter allegations against parents of the respondent.
8. The trial Court observed that the old age parents are not living in their own house due to hostile environment in the house; that the petitioner is not living as a part of joint family and the nature of relationship between the parents is not cordial. Holding so, allowed the petition. However, trial Court directed the respondent to provide alternate accommodation to PNR,J CRP No.10 of 2023 5 petitioner and give 20,000/- per month as maintenance amount. She was allowed to continue in the same house till alternate accommodation is provided.
9. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner and respondent extensively.
10. Primarily it is contended by the learned counsel for petitioner that the application filed by the respondent is not maintainable in view of provision in Section 7 of the Act, 1984. Further, as per Section 2(a) (f) (g) and (s) and Section 26 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for brevity hereinafter referred to as 'Act, 2005') respondent is not the person aggrieved.
11. It is further contended that no documents were marked. This is in violation of the circular instructions issued by the High Court bearing ROC No.2750/OP CELL/2021 dated 28.09.2021. It is further contended that the eviction order at interlocutory stage is not permissible as held in S. Vanitha Vs Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District and others1.
1 2021 (2) ALD 17 (SC) PNR,J CRP No.10 of 2023 6
12. Per contra, it is contended by learned counsel for respondent that as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satish Chandra Ahuja Vs Sneha Ahuja2 that right of residence of daughter-in-law is not an indefeasible right when daughter-in- law is pitted against father-in-law and mother-in-law. That the senior citizens are entitled to live peacefully. He has also relied on the decision of the Delhi High court in Vinay Varma Vs Kanika Pasricha3 and Ravneet Kaur Vs Prithpal Singh Dhingra4.
13. To appreciate respective contentions it is necessary to consider Section 75 of the Act, 1984 and Sections 2 (a)6 (f)7 (q)8 & (s)9 and 26 of the Act, 2005.
2 (2021) 1 SCC 414 3 2019 Lawsuit (Del) 3206 4 2022 Lawsuit (Del) 453 5
7. Jurisdiction.--(1) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, a Family Court shall--
(a) have and exercise all the jurisdiction exercisable by any district court or any subordinate civil court under any law for the time being in force in respect of suits and proceedings of the nature referred to in the Explanation;
and (b) be deemed, for the purposes of exercising such jurisdiction under such law, to be a district court or, as the case may be, such subordinate civil court for the area to which the jurisdiction of the Family Court extends.
Explanation.--The suits and proceedings referred to in this sub-section are suits and proceedings of the following nature, namely:--
(a) a suit or proceeding between the parties to a marriage for a decree of nullity of marriage (declaring the marriage to be null and void or, as the case may be, annulling the marriage) or restitution of conjugal rights or judicial separation or dissolution of marriage;
(b) a suit or proceeding for a declaration as to the validity of a marriage or as to the matrimonial status of any person;
(c) a suit or proceeding between the parties to a marriage with respect to the property of the parties or of either of them;
(d) a suit or proceeding for an order or injunction in circumstance arising out of a marital relationship;
(e) a suit or proceeding for a declaration as to the legitimacy of any person;
(f) a suit or proceeding for maintenance;
(g) a suit or proceeding in relation to the guardianship of the person or the custody of, or access to, any minor.
PNR,J CRP No.10 of 2023 7
14. The impugned order is passed in an application filed under Section 7 of the Act read with Section 151 CPC. Section 7 deals with jurisdiction of the Family Court. The Family Court shall have jurisdiction either to exercised by the District Court or Subordinate Civil Court in respect of suits and proceedings of the nature referred to in the explanation. The explanation lists out 7 areas in which Family Court shall have exclusive jurisdiction. For this case, clause (c) is relevant. According to this clause a suit or proceeding between the parties to a marriage with respect to the property of the parties or of either of them is maintainable before Family Court. Thus, family court (2) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, a Family Court shall also have and exercise--
(a) the jurisdiction exercisable by a Magistrate of the first class under Chapter IX (relating to order for maintenance of wife, children and parents) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974);
and (b) such other jurisdiction as may be conferred on it by any other enactment. 6 Section 2 (a) "aggrieved person" means any woman who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the respondent and who alleges to have been subjected to any act of domestic violence by the respondent;
7 Section 2 (f) "domestic relationship" means a relationship between two persons who live or have, at any point of time, lived together in a shared household, when they are related by consanguinity, marriage, or through a relationship in the nature of marriage, adoption or are family members living together as a joint family; 8
(q) "respondent" means any adult male person who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the aggrieved person and against whom the aggrieved person has sought any relief under this Act:
9
(s) "shared household" means a household where the person aggrieved lives or at any stage has lived in a domestic relationship either singly or along with the respondent and includes such a house hold whether owned or tenanted either jointly by the aggrieved person and the respondent, or owned or tenanted by either of them in respect of which either the aggrieved person or the respondent or both jointly or singly have any right, title, interest or equity and includes such a household which may belong to the joint family of which the respondent is a member, irrespective of whether the respondent or the aggrieved person has any right, title or interest in the shared household;
PNR,J CRP No.10 of 2023 8 shall have jurisdiction to deal with a dispute on property belonging to both parties to the marriage or either of them. In the case on hand, the property in issue does not belong to either of the parties to the marriage but to the parents of the respondent. Thus, I.A.No.568 of 2022 filed under Section 7 in the Family Court by the respondent who is a party to the marriage is not maintainable. Further, in a O.P. filed under Section 13 (1) (a) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 to grant divorce application to evict the petitioner from a property which does not belong to respondent is not maintainable.
15. Further according to Section 2(s) of Act, 2005 a household which may belong to the joint family of which the respondent is a member irrespective of whether the respondent or the aggrieved person has any right, title or interest is a 'shared household'. It refers to 'person aggrieved'. Clause (a) of Section 2 defines 'aggrieved person'. It means any woman who has a grievance. Term 'Respondent' used in this clause, as defined in clause (q) means any adult male person who is or has been in a domestic relationship with the aggrieved person. 'Domestic relationship' as defined in clause 'f' is again very wide and includes living together as a joint family. A cumulative reading of these clauses and other provisions of the Act, 2005 make it PNR,J CRP No.10 of 2023 9 clear that the proceedings initiated by respondent are not valid in law. He can not seek to evict petitioner from the 'shared household'
16. Be that as it may, as I.A., is not maintainable under Section 7 of the Act, the order under challenge is not sustainable.
17. Further, according to respondent, the concerned house belongs to his parents and he has no say in the house. He is not living in the house. If that is so, application under Section 7 of the Act is not maintainable. If his parents have a grievance it is for them to work out remedies as available in law. In a Section 7 of the Act application the respondent cannot espouse their cause.
18. For the reasons stated above, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed. Pending miscellaneous applications if any shall stand closed.
__________________________ JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO Date: 03.02.2023 Rds/kkm PNR,J CRP No.10 of 2023 10 HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.10 of 2023 Date: 03.02.2023 RDS/KKM