Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.23 seconds)M/S Jeevan Diesels & Electricals Ltd vs M/S Jasbir Singh Chadha (Huf) & Anr on 7 May, 2010
17. It was further argued by Ld. Counsel for the appellant that the
appellants and answering respondents No. 2 to 5 have never admitted any
fact in their written statement and had rather denied the
plaintiff/respondent No. 1 to be the owner of the suit property. It has been
claimed that the DDA had alloted the land to all the members of the family
but the name of respondent No. 1/plaintiff was mentioned in the court
records being the 'karta'. The Ld. Counsel relied upon the judgment in
M/S Jeewan Diesels & Electrical Limited Vs. M/S Jasbir Singh Chadha
(HUF) & anr. (2010) 6 SCC 601. The Hon'ble Apex Court while referring
to various precedents held that in order to pass a judgment on admissions
by the defendant, such admissions should be clear and unambiguous.
However, it was also observed by the Hon'ble Court in para 13 as under :
Smt. Shumita Didi Sandhu vs Mr. Sanjay Singh Sandhu And Ors. on 2 July, 2007
The Court further relied upon
the judgment in Smt. Shumita Didi Sandhu Vs. Mr. Sanjay Singh
Sandhu & ors. 2007 (2) FJCC 236, wherein it was held that a daughter
inlaw has no legal right to stay in the house which belongs to her
parentsinlaw. Only the husband has the legal and moral obligation to
provide residence to his wife. Therefore, a wife can claim right of
residence only against her husband and not her parentsinlaw.
Mr. Barun Kumar Nahar vs Parul Nahar & Anr. on 5 February, 2013
26. This view has been followed in a catena of judgments of our
own High Court, such as, Barun Kumar Nahar Vs. Parul Nahar
http://indiankanoon .org/doc/163730213/; Prem Prakash Dabral Vs.
Smt. Shikha Dabral & anr. (RSA 190 of 2011 dt. 22.1.2014); and Sudha
Mishra Vs. Surya Chand Mishra (RFA No. 299 of 2014 dt. 25.7.2014).
In all these cases, it was held that if the property in question is not a shared
household, the wife/daughterinlaw has no legal right to stay in the same.
Ajab Singh vs Shital Puri (Deceased By Lrs.) on 20 January, 1993
In my opinion , this position
is well settled. Even the Ld. Trial Court had taken care of this aspect and
placed reliance upon the judgment in Ajab Singh Vs. Shital Puri AIR
1993 Allahabad 138, Jagdish Vs. Brijlal (2007) 145 PLR 398 and Puran
Mal Modi Vs. Rajasthan Investors Pvt. Ltd. 2005 (1) RCR (Rent) 496
(Raj.), wherein it was held by the Courts that a licensor can seek
possession of the suit property by a suit for mandatory injunction , after
revoking the license.
Navneet Arora vs Surender Kaur & Ors. on 10 September, 2014
27. Ld. Counsel for the appellant placed heavy reliance on a
judgment in Navneet Arora Vs. Surender Kaur & ors. 213 (2014) DLT
611 DB . However, the facts of the said case were different and would
not apply to the facts of the instant case. The daughterinlaw claiming
right of residence in the said case was a widow but was residing with her
deceased husband in the house of her inlaws till the time of his death and
even till the date of decision, in a joint family. Hence, in such
circumstances, the right of residence was granted to her.
Section 125 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Sudha Mishra vs Surya Chandra Mishra on 25 February, 2015
26. This view has been followed in a catena of judgments of our
own High Court, such as, Barun Kumar Nahar Vs. Parul Nahar
http://indiankanoon .org/doc/163730213/; Prem Prakash Dabral Vs.
Smt. Shikha Dabral & anr. (RSA 190 of 2011 dt. 22.1.2014); and Sudha
Mishra Vs. Surya Chand Mishra (RFA No. 299 of 2014 dt. 25.7.2014).
In all these cases, it was held that if the property in question is not a shared
household, the wife/daughterinlaw has no legal right to stay in the same.
Ridhima Juneja vs Deven Juneja on 13 January, 2014
This
principle was followed in Master Ryan through his mother Mrs. Ridhima
Juneja Vs. PN Juneja & sons (HUF) 2009 (163) DLT 144.
Sh. Prem Prakash Dabral vs Smt. Sikha Dabral And Anr. on 22 January, 2014
26. This view has been followed in a catena of judgments of our
own High Court, such as, Barun Kumar Nahar Vs. Parul Nahar
http://indiankanoon .org/doc/163730213/; Prem Prakash Dabral Vs.
Smt. Shikha Dabral & anr. (RSA 190 of 2011 dt. 22.1.2014); and Sudha
Mishra Vs. Surya Chand Mishra (RFA No. 299 of 2014 dt. 25.7.2014).
In all these cases, it was held that if the property in question is not a shared
household, the wife/daughterinlaw has no legal right to stay in the same.
1