Mumbai News: Senior Citizen Tribunal Rejects Eviction Plea Against Daughter-In-Law, Terms It Misuse Of Law

Mumbai: In a rare ruling, the Senior Citizen Tribunal has dismissed an application filed by a senior citizen seeking eviction of his daughter-in-law from the shared household, thereby accepting her argument that the plea was filed solely to misuse the Senior Citizens Act, 2007.

Collusion Alleged Between Father-In-Law And Son

The tribunal also noted the daughter-in-law’s contention that the father-in-law, in collusion with his son, attempted to use the provisions of the Act to forcefully evict her from her matrimonial home.

Meanwhile, the order emphasized that although the eviction plea has been rejected, the daughter-in-law must ensure that the senior citizen faces no harassment, in line with the protections under the Senior Citizens Act.

Domestic Violence Complaint Already Filed

Advocate Adnan Mookhtiar appeared on behalf of the daughter-in-law, Malti Pendse (name changed). According to case records, Malti alleged that she was subjected to cruelty by her husband and in-laws, which led her to file a domestic violence complaint against all three.

She contended that the eviction application was a retaliatory move intended to harass her and deprive her of her right to reside in the shared household.

Malti argued that she had already taken legal recourse under the Domestic Violence Act due to “constant atrocities” committed against her. She further stated that she is a working woman with minimal interaction with her father-in-law, except when he allegedly initiates contact to commit acts of cruelty.

Tribunal Notes Child’s Welfare At Stake

The tribunal accepted Malti’s plea that the case was filed because of ongoing matrimonial disputes and observed that the eviction plea appeared to be an attempt to undermine her legal rights and ongoing proceedings under the DV Act.

Mumbai News: Appellate Tribunal Orders Son, Daughter-In-Law To Vacate Senior Citizen Mother’s House Within 30 Days

Her arguments also highlighted that such an order would adversely affect the couple’s minor child. “The child, currently under the mother’s care, would suffer emotional and practical hardships if the eviction was enforced. Great difficulty will be caused to the minor if an eviction order is passed,” the arguments stated, stressing that the welfare of the child was paramount.