Father-In-Law Has 'Pious Obligation' To Maintain Widowed Daughter-In-Law If She Can't Maintain Herself: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that a father-in-law has a “pious obligation” to maintain his widowed daughter-in-law if she is unable to maintain herself from her own earnings, property or the estate of her deceased husband.

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna observed that the statutory scheme under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAMA) recognises a widowed daughter-in-law as a person entitled to maintenance, which includes residence and shelter.

The Court was dealing with an appeal filed by the legal representatives of a deceased man against a decree directing them to vacate a property in Paschim Vihar and pay mesne profits.

The deceased had been residing in the property with his wife and daughters. During the pendency of the suit, he died, following which his widow and two daughters were brought on record as his legal representatives. They continued to reside in the property.

The father-in-law, who was the owner of the property, sought their eviction. The widow contended that the property constituted her “shared household” under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and that she had an independent right of residence therein.

The Court held that the property was indeed the widow's shared household and that her right of residence was not extinguished by the death of her husband.

The Court examined Section 19 of HAMA, which provides for maintenance of a widowed daughter-in-law by her father-in-law, subject to the statutory conditions.

It noted that Section 3(b) of HAMA defines “maintenance” to include provision for food, clothing, residence, education and medical attendance and treatment. Therefore, the obligation is not confined to financial support but also encompasses the provision of shelter.

Referring to the Supreme Court's recent decision in Kanchana Rai v. Geeta Sharma, the Court noted that Section 19 casts an obligation upon the father-in-law to maintain his widowed daughter-in-law during his lifetime. It thereafter observed:

“On the demise of son, it is the pious obligation of the father-in-law to maintain widowed daughter-in-law, if she is unable to maintain herself either or her own or through the property left behind by the deceased son. The statutory scheme of HAMA thus, recognises a widowed daughter-in-law as a person entitled to maintenance, which includes residence, where she is unable to maintain herself from the sources contemplated under the Act.”

On father-in-law's demise, Sections 21 and 22 of HAMA come into play which provide that the heirs of a deceased Hindu are bound to maintain the dependants of the deceased out of the estate inherited by them from the deceased.

At the same time, the Court clarified that the widow's right of residence does not constitute an absolute bar against the property owner's right to recover possession.

The Court observed that the rights of the father-in-law, as owner, and the widowed daughter-in-law's right to shelter have to be balanced.

In the present case, the father-in-law was not residing in the suit property, while the widow had lived there with her daughters for more than two decades and no alternative residence was shown to be available to her.

As such, the Court upheld the decree for possession but directed that it cannot be executed until the father-in-law either secures suitable alternate accommodation for the widow in the same or a nearby locality, commensurate with the accommodation she was enjoying, or pays her ₹15,000 per month towards rent.

The Court also set aside the trial court's award of Rs. 10,000 per month towards damages/mesne profits.

For Appellants: Mr.Tripurari Jha & Mr. Brajesh Kumar, Advocates.

For Respondent: Mr. Shantanu Singh and Mr. Rajneesh Tingal, Advocates.