The Delhi High Court bench comprising of Justice Jayanth Nath while evicting women from her brother’s home stated that “a person can’t claim a right to siblings self-acquired property”.
A permanent injunction decree was passed by the court against the women and barred her from entering the house of her brother where she had been living since 2005. The women broke down her marriage after which she moved to her brother’s house and as time being there was damage in relation as she dug in her heels in the property claiming that the property was bought from the funds which were generated out of family business.
The women have maintained that the property was not purchased by her brother through the self-acquired funds but was acquired through funds of Hindu Joint Family property as the money for buying it was siphoned from the joint family business.
However, HC has insisted on proof in relation to tax and other details that could throw light on the property.
It was noted that the plea of women was silent “as to when HUF joint family property came into existence, especially if the HUF came into existence prior to 1956 or post-1956 on account of throwing of properties into a common hotchpotch. There is no reference to any income tax returns filed by any of the ancestors whereby the properties were shown as HUF/joint family properties.”
Appearing for the brother, advocate Prabhjit Jauhar told HC that the woman had also filed various criminal cases against her family members and refused to vacate the property. He informed the court that it was bought by the brother and his wife in 2001 and is registered in their names. Due to her marital discord, she was allowed to stay there as a “gratuitous licensee”.
The court agreed and noted that except “for a bald plea in the written statement that the suit property has been purchased from funds siphoned off from the family business”, there was no evidence brought before it to explain what rights she had to reside there. Even though the property was purchased in 2001 and the women returned from her matrimonial house in 2005, she waited till 2017 to raise the plea to right in the property, High Court noted.
Courtesy/By: Rishikesh
|
05 Mar 2019
