Back
Anil Kshetarpal, Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, JJ
Kuldeep Kaur – Appellant
Versus
Swaran Kaur – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of facts, property ownership claims, and the history of litigation. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. contentions regarding title, status of the property, and the nature of residency rights. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 3. legal principles governing 'shared household' status post-divorce under the pwdv act. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 4. validation of ownership through registered deeds and legal conclusion on eviction. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35) |
J U D G M E N T
ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.
1. The present Appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 assails the correctness of Order dated 22.03.2024 [hereinafter referred to as “Impugned Order”] passed by the learned Family Court [hereinafter referred to as the “Family Court”], whereby the suit for possession, damages/ use and occupation charges, permanent as well as mandatory injunction filed by the Respondent, was decreed in her favour.
FACTUAL MATRIX
2. The brief facts leading to the present Appeal, as pleaded, are that the Appellant and the Respondent share a matrimonial and familial relationship. The Appellant is the daughter-in-law of
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
