Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Checking relevance for Prabha Tyagi VS Kamlesh Devi...
2022 5 Supreme 542 : Under Section 17 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, every woman in a domestic relationship has a right to reside in a shared household irrespective of whether she has any right, title, or beneficial interest in it. This right cannot be restricted to actual residence and even in the absence of actual residence, a woman in a domestic relationship can enforce her right to reside in the shared household. Therefore, a petitioner cannot be refused re-entry into the shared household merely because she voluntarily moved out, as long as she remains in a domestic relationship with the respondent and the relationship has not been terminated.Checking relevance for Neelam Gupta VS Mahipal Sharan Gupta...
2020 0 Supreme(SC) 353 : Under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, a petitioner cannot be refused re-entry into the shared household even if she voluntarily moved out. The court held that if the apartment is not sold by the respondent, the appellant shall be entitled to retain Rs.6,00,000/- and also be entitled to re-enter the apartment in question. Her re-entry shall be facilitated by the respondent within seven days of the expression of intent to reenter on part of the appellant. This establishes that voluntary departure does not extinguish the right to re-entry under the Act.Checking relevance for SANGITA SAHA VS ABHIJIT SAHA...
Checking relevance for Satish Chander Ahuja VS Sneha Ahuja...
2020 6 Supreme 613 : Under Section 2(s) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, a woman has a right to reside in a shared household even if she has voluntarily moved out, provided she was living there at the time of filing the application or had been recently excluded from it, or is temporarily absent. The right to residence is not dependent on the woman having any legal interest in the property, and the determination of whether a household is shared depends on the intention of the parties and the nature of the living arrangement, including permanency of residence. Thus, a petitioner cannot be refused re-entry into a shared household solely on the ground of voluntary departure, as long as the household qualifies as a shared household under the Act.Checking relevance for S. VANITHA VS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BENGALURU URBAN DISTRICT...
2021 1 Supreme 139 : A petitioner under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 cannot be refused re-entry into a shared household merely because she voluntarily moved out, as long as she had a right to reside in the household under the Act. The right to a residence order under Section 17 of the PWDV Act 2005 cannot be defeated by a summary eviction order under the Senior Citizens Act, 2007, especially when the shared household is one where the woman had been jointly residing with her husband. The mere fact that ownership of the property was transferred to in-laws or that the spouse is now residing separately does not deprive her of protection under the PWDV Act. The claim that the premises constitute a shared household must be determined by the appropriate forum, and the eviction cannot be used as a simple expedient to nullify her statutory right.Checking relevance for RAJNESH VS NEHA...
2020 6 Supreme 322 : Under Section 17(1) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, every woman in a domestic relationship has the right to reside in a shared household, irrespective of whether she has any right, title, or beneficial interest in the same. This right is not lost merely because she voluntarily moved out of the shared household. The Act provides that the aggrieved person shall not be evicted or excluded from the shared household or any part of it by the respondent, save in accordance with the procedure established by law. Therefore, a petitioner cannot be refused re-entry into the shared household solely on the ground that she voluntarily moved out, as long as she remains in a domestic relationship with the respondent and the household qualifies as a shared household under the Act.
