Whether daughter in law is legal heir of senior citizen if her husband is alive?

Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to many decisions of this Court to contend that the daughter-in-law has no right to live in the house of the father-in-law but all these decisions are not applicable at all to the facts and circumstances of this case because both father and son are conniving with each other for seeking eviction of respondent No. 3, who is also having a small girl child, from the house in question by using the provisions of Section 22 of the Act, Rules and the Action Plan in which it is categorically provided that the District Magistrate shall have the power only to dispossess a son, daughter or legal heir. The Act does not define son, daughter or legal heir rather it defined only children and relative but according to Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, if a husband is alive, the daughter-in-law would not fall within the definition of legal heir either in Class 1 or Class II of the Schedule. In this regard, the judgments relied upon by learned counsel for respondent No. 3 in the cases of Ranjit Kaur (Supra), Ram Saroop Walia (Supra) and Amar Chand Sharma and another (Supra) would come to the rescue of respondent No. 3 and for this Court to form an opinion that the application filed by the petitioner under Section 22 of the Act was not maintainable because the petitioner has only tried to evict his daughter-in-law from the house in dispute.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

CWP Nos. 5722 and 6917 of 2017

Decided On: 06.08.2018

Vimaljit Singh Vs  District Magistrate, SAS Nagar, Mohali and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Rakesh Kumar Jain, J.

Citation:AIR 2018 P &H 185

Print Page

Whether application U/S 22 of Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act is tenable against Daughter-in-law?

 In view of the above, an application under Section 22 of the Act would be maintainable against any person irrespective of the fact whether the respondent in the application falls within the category of persons as defined in any of the definitions as provided for in Section 2 of the Act or otherwise. The only rider is that the applicant should be a senior citizen as defined in Section 2(h) i.e. a citizen of India, who has attained the age of 60 years or above and further as defined in Section 2 (f), he/she has a property of any kind whether movable or immovable or self acquired, tangible or intangible and includes rights and interest in such property. Accordingly, it cannot be said that the application preferred by respondent Nos.2 and 3 against the petitioner, who is daughter-in-law, would not be maintainable under Section 22 of the Act.

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Balbir Kaur vs Presiding Officer-Cum-Sdm And ... on 29 June, 2015

CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.15477 OF 2014 (O&M)  

Citation;AIR 2016 P&H 4

Print Page

Whether application U/S 22 of Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act is maintainable against person who is not relative of senior citizen?

In view of the above, an application under Section 22 of the Act
would be maintainable against any person irrespective of the fact whether
the respondent in the application falls within the category of persons as
defined in any of the definitions as provided for in Section 2 of the Act or
otherwise. The only rider is that the applicant should be a senior citizen as
defined in Section 2(h) i.e. a citizen of India, who has attained the age of 60
years or above and further as defined in Section 2 (f), he/she has a property
of any kind whether movable or immovable or self acquired, tangible or
intangible and includes rights and interest in such property. Accordingly, it
cannot be said that the application preferred by respondent Nos.2 and 3
against the petitioner, who is daughter-in-law, would not be maintainable
under Section 22 of the Act.Hence answer to the first question is that the application
under Section 22 of the Act filed by respondent Nos.2 and 3 being senior
citizens is maintainable
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.15477 OF 2014 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
DATE OF DECISION: JUNE 29, 2015
Balbir Kaur
V
Presiding Officer-cum-S.D.M. of the Maintenance & Welfare of Senior
Citizen Tribunal, Pehowa, District Kurukshetra and others

CORAM:- MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH
Citation;AIR 2016 Punjab and Haryana 4

Print Page