Readers neutral comment on larger public interest invited to below two Judgments please !
A landmark order from Hon'ble SC where a Daughter in Law has been asked to pay the rent to the
mother in law, treating the later as a home owner.
The Husband had won an order from the Hon'ble HC Mumbai where the court had directed his wife
to pay dues as arrears to her mother in law who is the Respondent 2 in his case, for living in the flat in mother in law's name in Pune. She was directed to pay Rs. 5000 / month from the time she with her parents had forcefully started living in that property after chasing husband out. This order was taken by her to the Hon'ble SC.
Yesterday Hon'ble SC dismissed her appeal and asked her to pay the dues. This is a landmark order where a Daughter in Law has been asked to pay the rent to the Mother in Law, treating the later as a home owner.
I am pasting the Hon'ble Mumbai HC Order and then the Hon'ble SC order of yesterday.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.8283 OF 2008
Sanchita Amitabh Dasgupta .. Petitioner.
Vs.
Amitabh Prashant Dasgupta & Anr. .. Respondents.
Mr.Nikhil Karnavat i/b Mr.Ajit Kulkarni for the petitioner.
Mr.Anil Dhavale i/b A.Apte for the respondents.
Coram: D.B. BHOSALE, J.
Dated : 17TH AUGUST, 2009
P.C.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and her husband were inducted in the flat by respondent no.2 – mother-in-law by executing the leave and license agreement dated 26.6.2006 and, therefore, the order of Family Court directing her to vacate the flat and hand it over to respondent no.2 is wrong and illegal. Rule expedited.
3. Under the leave and license agreement the petitioner is liable to pay Rs.5,000/- per month to respondent no.2 which has not been paid since long. The petitioner alone is in possession of the flat. In the circumstances there shall be interim relief in terms of prayer clause (b) subject to the petitioner depositing
the entire arrears of license fee under the leave and license agreement dated 26.6.2006 in this court within a period of eight weeks from today and shall also deposit monthly license fee during pendency of this writ petition every month. If the petitioner fails to deposit the amount, as aforestated, this petition shall stand dismissed for non prosecution without reference to the court. If the petitioner deposits the amount,
liberty to respondent no.2 to withdraw the said amount without prejudice to her rights and contentions. Pendency of this petition shall not operate as stay to further proceedings before the Family Court.
(D. B. Bhosale, J.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hon'ble Supreme Court Order
ITEM NO.6 COURT NO.4 SECTION IX
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)
No(s).26247/2009
(From the judgement and order dated 17/08/2009 in WP No.
8283/2008 of The HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY)
SANCHITA AMITABH DASGUPTA Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
AMITABH PRASHANT DASGUPTA & ANR. Respondent(s)
(With appln(s) for exemption from filing c/c of the impugned
Judgment and prayer for interim relief )
Date: 19/07/2010 This Petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DALVEER BHANDARI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK VERMA
For Petitioner(s) Mrs.Neela Gokhale,ADv.
Mr.Vijay Kumar, Adv.
for Mr. Vishwajit Singh,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mrs.Seema, Adv.
Mr.Nitin S.Tambwekar, Adv.
Mr.B.S.Sai, Adv.
For Mr. K. Rajeev,Adv.
Ms. Anagha S.Desai ,Adv
Ms.Seema Dhyavle, Adv.
UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned
order. The Special Leave Petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
(G.V.Ramana) (Neeru Bala Vij)
Court Master Court Master
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
