SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Rishika Puri vs Nirmal Puri & Anr on 15 July, 2019

Date of Decision: 15.07.2019
+ RFA No. 448/2019 C.M. Nos.22422/2019 (for direction
regarding service of court order, 22424/2019 (for stay),
26125/2019 (for delay of 148 days in filing the appeal)

RISHIKA PURI ….. Appellant
Through: Ms.Niti Richhariya, Adv. with
appellant in person.


NIRMAL PURI ANR ….. Respondents
Through: Mr.Ashwin Romy, proxy counsel
for R-1 with R-1 in person.
Mr.Manish Garg, Adv. for R-2
with R-2 in person.



1. The present appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908 assails the judgment and decree dated 27.08.2018
passed by the learned Trial Court in CS No.141/2017 whereby the
suit preferred by the respondent no. 1 has been decreed for
possession, on admission, by invoking Order XII Rule 6 CPC.

2. The first respondent, aged about 73 years, is the mother-in-
law of the appellant who is married to her son, i.e., respondent
no.2. The first floor of the property, bearing no. A-241, Meera
Bagh, Paschim Vihar, New Delhi, (‘suit premises’ for short)
admittedly belongs to the respondent no.1. In her suit for
possession, mesne profits and damages against the appellant, she

RFA 448/2019 Page 1 of 7
had pleaded that the respondent no.2 was her son and had gotten
married to the appellant on 25.10.2004. Out of the said wedlock,
they were blessed with a girl child who is presently about 13 years
old. It was further claimed that the respondent no.1 had permitted
the appellant and her son- respondent no.2 to reside in the suit
premises as a licensee, purely out of her love and affection for
them; but for the last many years, both the appellant and her
husband/respondent no.2 had become highly disrespectful towards
her aged husband and her and, therefore, she was under no
obligation to permit them to continue to reside in her house, when
they had became a source of constant nuisance and trouble to her.
It was further claimed in the plaint that even though the appellant
used to abuse and torture the respondent no.1 and her husband, they
were still continuing to take care of her minor daughter, in her

3. On the other hand, the appellant, in her defence, while not
denying that the property was in the name of the respondent no.1,
had stated that her husband/respondent no.2, with whom she was
having matrimonial differences, was in league with the respondent
no.1 and had, merely as a ruse, taken a nearby accommodation on
rent. She claimed that the respondent no.2 continued to stay in the
suit premises but had taken a false stand that he was not residing
there in support of his plea that the suit premises was not a ‘shared
household’ of the appellant within the ambit of the Protection of
Women from SectionDomestic Violence Act, 2005 (‘SectionD.V. Act’ for short)
thereby disentitling her to continue to reside in the suit premises.
She further contended that the respondent no.2 had, at the
instigation of his parents, filed a wholly misconceived divorce
petition against her, which she is suitably defending.

RFA 448/2019 Page 2 of 7

4. In view of the appellant not denying that the suit premises
was in the name of her mother in law/respondent no.1, an
application under Order XII Rule 6, CPC was preferred by the said
respondent. The learned Trial Court found merit in the respondent
no.1’s application and accordingly, vide the impugned judgment
dated 27.08.2018, passed a decree for possession against the
appellant. It is stated that the respondent no.1’s claim for mesne
profits is pending adjudication before the learned Trial Court.

5. When the present appeal was taken up for hearing, the
parties were heard at length in Chamber. The appellant raised a
grievance that even though the respondent no.2 had been directed
to pay her a monthly maintenance of Rs.5,000/- by the matrimonial
court, the said amount is not being paid to her regularly. On the
other hand, respondent no.2 claimed that he is already paying a
monthly sum of Rs.7,000/- towards their daughter’s tuition fee,
which is, in fact, much more than the maintenance awarded to the
appellant by the Matrimonial Court.

6. Keeping in view the fact that the respondent no.1, due to her
old age, did not want the appellant to continue to stay in her house,
certain suggestions were made to them and the respondent no.2
was asked to look for a suitable alternative accommodation in the
neighbourhood of the suit premises, where the appellant could
reside with their daughter. It was made clear to the parties that this
aspect was not a subject of consideration before this Court and that
the parties would be free to agitate this issue before the
matrimonial court, where the appellant’s claim regarding
maintenance is pending adjudication. On the last date, the
respondent no.1 had made an offer to the appellant that she, along
with their minor daughter, could shift to the premises in which the

RFA 448/2019 Page 3 of 7
respondent no.2 claimed to have been residing since 2016. The said
property, i.e., half portion on the eastern side of second floor
without roof rights a part of property bearing no. A-173, Meera
Bagh, Paschim Vihar, New Delhi (‘alternative accommodation’ for
short) is a tenanted property which had been taken up by the
respondent no.2 on lease. After negotiations, it had been agreed
between the parties that the appellant will shift to the alternative
accommodation on or before 31.07.2019 for which purpose, a fresh
rent agreement will be executed between the landlady thereof
namely, Ms.Saroj Sharma and the appellant for a period of 11
months. A copy of the draft rent agreement has been handed over
by the learned counsel for the respondent no.2 and the same is
taken on record. The agreed monthly rent of the alternative
accommodation is Rs.13,000/- w.e.f. 01.08.2019 which will be
paid directly by respondent no.2 to the landlady. The respondent
no.2 will also pay a fixed monthly sum of Rs.2,000/- to the
appellant towards electricity charges which will be directly
credited into the appellant’s account bearing the following details:
Ms.Rishika, Saving A/c No.20004041921, Bank of Maharashtra,
Paschim Vihar Branch, IFSC-MAHB0001239. In return, the
appellant will send a copy of the electricity bill to the respondent
no.2 by post, as and when the same is received by her. It is,
however, made clear that irrespective of the actual amount payable
under the electricity bill, the respondent no.2 shall continue to pay
the appellant the agreed amount of Rs.2,000/- towards payment of
the electricity charges.

7. As the minor daughter of the parties is also shifting to the
aforesaid alternative accommodation, the respondent no.2 has also
offered to obtain a gas connection and basic utensils for running

RFA 448/2019 Page 4 of 7
the kitchen in the said premises. It is also stated that an air
conditioner and a geyser are already installed there, for the use of
the appellant and the minor daughter of the parties. Though the
said offer is acceptable to the appellant, she has expressed her
apprehension that in case the lease is not executed or is not
extended by the landlady in the future, the appellant and her minor
daughter might be left without any shelter and it may become very
difficult for her to gain entry into her matrimonial home, which is
owned by the respondent no.1. Accordingly, it is agreed between
the parties that, subject to the rent agreement being executed by the
landlady for a period of 11 months as assured by the respondent,
the appellant along with her minor daughter will vacate the suit
premises on or before 31.07.2019 and that she will be allowed to
take her belongings which are enumerated herein below:-

i. Double Bed
ii. Cooler
iii. Iron
iv. Clothes of the appellant her daughter
v. Utensils
vi. Footwears
vii. Books
viii. Blender

8. Learned counsel for the respondent no.2, on instructions
from the respondent no.2 who is present in Court, submits that
though the draft of the proposed lease deed has already been
finalized, in case the lease is not executed or not extended
subsequently for any reason whatsoever, the respondent no.2
undertakes to pay a monthly sum of Rs.15,000/- to the appellant
towards rent and electricity charges w.e.f. 01.08.2019, amount will
continue to be paid by him till the matter is finally resolved in the
pending proceedings under the SectionD.V. Act or in case the parties

RFA 448/2019 Page 5 of 7
arrive at any other amicable settlement. The aforesaid statement of
the respondent no.2 is taken on record and an undertaking to this
effect will be filed by him before this Court within one week. It is
made clear that the breach of the aforesaid statement would not
only entitle the appellant to seek execution but would also entitle
her to initiate contempt proceedings against the respondent no.2.

9. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant further
expresses her apprehension that since the appellant is a working
mother, in case she shifts to the alternative accommodation as is
being offered by the respondent no.2, she may face occasional
difficulties in taking care of her minor daughter who is presently
living in the joint family and is being looked after with the help of
the respondent no.1 and her husband when the appellant is not at
home. Learned counsel for the respondent no.1, on instructions
from the respondent no.1, submits that the said respondent and her
husband are very fond of their granddaughter and in case the
appellant occasionally entrusts her in their care and custody during
the day, they will take care of her even though they are under no
legal obligation to do so. Learned counsel for the respondent no.1,
on instructions from the said respondent, submits that she will
withdraw her claim for mesne profits and damages for the period
during which the appellant had continued to reside in the suit
premises. She however, submits that she will continue to pursue
her remaining claims against the appellant.

10. In view of the aforesaid settlement whereby the appellant
along with her minor daughter will shift to an alternative
accommodation, the parties undertake not to interfere with the
peaceful possession and enjoyment of each other’s premises.

11. For the aforesaid reasons, the appeal is partly allowed by

RFA 448/2019 Page 6 of 7
modifying the impugned judgment and decree. The suit filed by the
first respondent is disposed of by decreeing that the appellant
would vacate the first floor of the suit premises bearing no. A-241,
Meera Bagh, Paschim Vihar, New Delhi on or before the midnight
of 31.07.2019.

12. Since the appeal is being disposed of on the basis of an
amicable settlement arrived at between the parties, the respondents
do not oppose the application for condonation of delay being C.M.
No.26125/2019. For the reasons stated in the same, the aforesaid
application is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is

13. The appeal is disposed of along with the pending
applications in the aforesaid terms.

JULY 15, 2019

RFA 448/2019 Page 7 of 7

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation