Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

Defiance by Husband and Father-in-law Leads To Sale of Property  for Daughter-in-law’s Maintenance Claim: Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal development, the Supreme Court of India delivered a groundbreaking judgment on October 20, 2023, addressing a maintenance claim by a daughter-in-law against her father-in-law and mother-in-law. The case involved a deteriorated marital relationship, legal proceedings, and a series of complex issues surrounding property attachment, auctions, and the invocation of Article 142 of the Constitution for complete justice.

The judgment, authored by Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Justice Aravind Kumar, made a notable observation regarding the behavior of the husband and father-in-law, stating, “The past history of this case, and the orders of this court have demonstrated the utter obduracy of Varun Gopal, who abandoned the wife, and virtually fled to Australia.” This observation reflects the court’s concern over the conduct of the parties involved.

The crux of the case revolved around the daughter-in-law’s pursuit of arrears and monthly maintenance from her in-laws, as her husband’s anticipatory bail had been denied. The Trial Court had granted interim maintenance, which was subsequently enhanced. The daughter-in-law also asserted her rights to inheritance from ancestral property. Her husband had obtained a divorce decree in Australia, further complicating the matter.

Despite efforts to attach and auction specific properties, including 11 shops, all attempts had been in vain. In light of the persistent defiance by the husband and father-in-law in complying with court orders, the Supreme Court invoked its power under Article 142 of the Constitution to ensure complete justice.

As a result of this landmark judgment, the Supreme Court directed the sale of six contiguous shops and the continuation of the attachment of rents from a fitness center. Moreover, it provided options for the daughter-in-law to either receive the transfer of title to specific premises or proceed with their sale.

This ruling is significant as it underscores the court’s commitment to upholding justice and ensuring that individuals fulfill their responsibilities, particularly in maintenance claims. It serves as a precedent for cases where parties defy court orders, emphasizing the court’s authority to take appropriate actions to safeguard the rights of the aggrieved parties.

The daughter-in-law was represented by Ms. Jaspreet Gogia, who served as the Amicus Curiae, contributing significantly to the case’s outcome. This judgment reaffirms the court’s dedication to addressing complex legal matters with compassion and fairness, particularly in cases involving maintenance claims and property disputes.

Date of Decision: October 20, 2023

MANMOHAN GOPAL VS THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ANR.

Latest Legal News