The Delhi High court on Tuesday directed that a son, irrespective of his marital status does not have any legal right to live in his parents’ house. The High court said that the son could reside in his parents’ house only at their “mercy”. The High court said the son could stay only because the parents have allowed him to stay in their house as they have cordial relations and not because they have to bear his “burden”.
Justice Pratibha Rani said that if the house has been self-acquired by the parents, then the son, married or unmarried could only stay in the house at the mercy of the parents and not because he has a legal right to. The High court gave this judgement as it was dismissing an appeal made by a husband and wife who had challenged a trial court’s order that had gone in the favour of the parents who had filed a law suit seeking the court’s orders for their son and daughter-in-law to vacate the house in their possession. The concerned parents had filed complaints at the police station stating that their son and daughter-in-law had made their “life hell”. They had also issued public notices in 2007 and 2012 about debarring the son and his wife from their self-acquired property.
The sons and the daughters-in-law had then contested the lawsuit in front of the trial court said that they were the co-owners of the house and had contributions in its purchase and construction. The trial court had however ruled the decision in the favour of the parents, following which the son and his wife had moved to the High court. The High Court Justice, Pratibha Rani on Tuesday noted that the son and his wife had failed to prove that they too had contributions in the purchase of the house, while the parents had established their contention by revealing the necessary documents.