The recent observation by the Bombay High Court highlights that the mere peace of mind of in-laws cannot serve as a valid justification for ejecting a woman from her residence.

“This is another factor which makes Petitioner believe that the order of Maintenance Tribunal for eviction of the couple is just a ploy to ensure only Petitioner’s ouster from home. It is not disputed that Petitioner is not earning herself and that she has no other place to reside. Therefore, Petitioner cannot be rendered homeless to ensure peace of mind of the senior citizens,” the order reads.

During a hearing presided over by Justice Sandeep Marne, a single judge bench, a woman had filed a petition challenging an order issued by the Tribunal established under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. The tribunal had directed the woman's husband to vacate the house within six months.

After being married for 27 years, disputes arose between the husband and wife. Subsequently, the in-laws of the woman filed a complaint under the Senior Citizens Act.

Following this, the woman also lodged a complaint under the Protection of Women Against Domestic Violence Act, 2005, with the metropolitan magistrate.

The woman contended that her in-laws filed the complaint under the Senior Citizens Act with the intention of obstructing her ability to assert her right to reside in the household as per the Domestic Violence Act. Subsequently, the tribunal established under the Senior Citizens Act issued an order instructing both the husband and wife to vacate the residence.

Subsequently, the tribunal established under the Senior Citizens Act issued an order instructing both the husband and wife to vacate the residence.

Nevertheless, the husband persisted in residing in the house without contesting the tribunal's order. The woman argued that the mechanisms provided by the Senior Citizens Act were exploited by her husband and in-laws to hinder her from exercising her rights.

The court noted that even after six months had elapsed since the issuance of the order, the husband had not taken any steps to search for alternative accommodation where the wife could exercise her right to reside in the household as per the Domestic Violence Act.

The High Court remarked that under the circumstance where the wife resides in a nuclear family with her husband in a separate residence away from her in-laws, Section 17 of the Domestic Violence Act would safeguard her from being evicted from the house owned by her husband.

Consequently, the court nullified the order issued by the tribunal under the Senior Citizens Act. Additionally, it instructed the magistrate court to promptly proceed with the hearing of the complaint filed under the Domestic Violence Act.

Case title: Sanjivani Jayesh Seernani vs Kavita Shyam Seernani