BEFORE THE HON’BLE SENIOR CITIZEN MAINTENANCE
TRIBUNAL AT BANDRA, MUMBAI.
SR NO. 150 of 2023
1) Mr. Suresh Parshuram Shelar )
2) Mrs. Mahananda Suresh Shelar ) … Applicants
Versus
1) Mrs. Madhura Prashant Shelar )
2) Mr. Prashant Suresh Shelar ) …Respondents
REPLY/WRITTEN STATEMENT ON BEHALF
OF THE RESPONDENT NO.1.
MAY IT PLEASE YOUR WORSHIP
1) At the outset the Respondent no.1 says and submits that Application
filed by the Applicants are false, frivolous and mala fide therefore the
same is not maintainable and liable to de dismissed with cost.
2) Without prejudice to what is stated above, the Respondent no.1further
says and submits that the above Application are filed on false and
frivolous grounds that to without any evidence and hence the
Application filed by the Applicants are liable to be dismissed with costs.
3) With reference of the Application, the Respondent no.1 denies that, the
Applicants has filed the present application u/s THE
MAINTENANCES AND WELFARE OF PARENTS AND SENIOR
CITIZEN ACT,2007 and same are false, fabricated and all the
averments are baseless and the same has not been supported by proper
documentary proof nor circumstantial evidence. The Respondent no.1
states that the Applicant’s sole motto is to harass and defame the
Respondent no.1 who is enjoying good reputation in the society at large.
Applicant’s application of portraying themself as an aggrieved person
under THE MAINTENANCES AND WELFARE OF PARENTS AND
SENIOR CITIZEN ACT, 2007 are denied and they are put to strict
proof of the same.
4) With reference to Application, the Respondent no.1 states that, the
contents therein are substantially correct. The Respondent no.1 states
that, she was then a Spinster, name Shilpa Shantaram Suryavanshi
married to the Respondent No.2, then a bachelor on 22nd May 2010 at
Anand Bhavan Hall, Charkop, Kandivali West, Mumbai as per Hindu
Religious Rights and Customs and after the marriage they started living
together as husband and wife staying in the same apartment of flat with
the applicants, husband and her son as per the Applicants cause title
address mentioned since Fourteen years.
5) The Respondent no.1 states that the prior to marriage Respondent No.2
came with his four wheeler and took the Respondent no.1 to his home
for introducing the Respondent no.1 with the Applicant no No.1 and 2
and Applicant No.1 and 2 told the Respondent no.1 to bring her mother
for discussing about the marriage therefore the Respondent no.1, her
mother and elder sister’s husband went and the Applicant No.2 told
that 50% of the marriage expenses is to be borne the Respondent’s no.1
family and the Applicant No.2 said that the Respondent No.2 is the
only son and he is educated till SSC and not completed his education at
all therefore she does not want any dowry or any amount from
respondent’s no.1 side therefore at last the marriage was fixed whereas
the applicant No.1 and 2 dreamt to have a grand wedding as it was their
only son’s marriage however the Respondent’s no.1 sister explained
them that they cannot afford grand wedding and 50 persons to be
invited from their side and not more than that as the Applicant No.2 was
working in BMC health department earning good salary and after few
days when they realized that expenditure are more therefore the
Respondent No.2 demanded Rs.2 lakhs from the Respondent no.1 and
thereafter it was settled to Rs.50,000/- which was paid in cash by
Respondents no.1 mother to Respondent no.2 and applicant no.1 and 2
and at last on 22/05/2010 the Respondent no.1 and Respondent No.2 got
married as per Hindu Vedic rites and customs. The Respondent no.1
further state that Applicant no.1 caught red handed by full bag of money
in AIR India during working hours for which cases are going on .
Applicant no.1 suspended from the job as mater is still pending in the
court.
6) The Respondent no.1 states that, the Applicant No.2 started taking
faults in Respondent’s no.1 doing household chores and the Applicant
No.2 was a dominating nature and all the household chores had to be
done according to her instructions and she did not allowed the
Respondent No.2 and Respondent no.1 to communicate with each other
except at night and they did not even involved the Respondent no.1 in
any of the family matter.
7) The Respondent states that, the Respondent No.2 told the Respondent
no.1 that he married the Respondent no.1 only for money and household
chores equivalent of a servant and for sexual purpose only and if she
cannot fulfill the same then she can leave the matrimonial home and as
days went on passing the mental and physical harassment went on
increasing by the Respondent no.1and the ApplicantNo.1 and 2 told the
Respondent No.2 and applicant no.2 to stay somewhere else on rental.
8) The Respondent no.1 further states that Respondent no.1 got the amount
from her mother which was her father’s field sold and it was shared
equally among all the siblings of the Respondent no.1 whereas the
Applicant received Rs.6,50,000/- (Rupees Six Lakhs Fifty Thousand
Only/-) as her share and Respondent no.2 and applicant no.1 and 2
aware of the same. The Respondent no.1 states that, the Applicant No.2
decided to purchase a shop at Ratnagiri from the remaining amount and
accordingly we purchase a Shop at Ratnagiri from the balance amount
of the Respondent no.1’s share and the Respondent no.1 and
Respondent No.2 owned jointly and the same Respondent no.1 was the
first owner and the Respondent No.2 as a second owner of the shop
which was purchased for Rs.4,30,0000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Thirty
Thousand Only/-) and the said Shop was duly registered with the
Registered Agreement executed on 07/11/2015 with the Sub Registrar,
Ratnagiri.
9) The Respondent no.1 states that the Respondent no.2 was having extra
martial affair with a married lady named [Link] Leeladhar who was
a neighbor in the same building and the Respondent No.2 mobile was
fully loaded with her photographs taken at our residence and even the
Applicant No.2 was also aware about all these immoral activities but
she acted as if she was not aware of it however [Link] had
confessed that Applicant No.2 was aware of their relationship.
10) The Respondent no.1 states during routine checkup for pregnancy at
Shatabldi Hospital the Respondent No.2 never used accompany the
Respondent no.1 therefore requested the Applicant No.2 to allow and
direct the Respondent No.2 to accompany the Respondent no.1 during
medical checkup but the Applicant No.2 rudely told the Respondent
no.1, just go and meet so and so person who knew the Applicant No.2
as she was working at BMC Health R –wards and she will guide you
and on 25/01/2012 the Applicant No.2 came along with Respondent
No.1the for medical checkup and Respondent No.2 went to pick up the
Applicant No.2 to drop her at home.
11) The Respondent No.1 further states that applicant no.2 shouted at the
Respondent no.1 and said that, “as to why did she met Sonali and her
husband and she can’t see her sons happiness and she had spoiled his
life and it is normal nowadays to have an affair and Respondent No.2
given you shelter, food, his name in society, luxurious life and what else
you want” and thereafter the Respondent No.2 increased harassment
and physical tortured and throw her out of house during pregnancy time.
12) The Respondent no.1 further states that on 25/02/2012 [Link] met
Respondent No.1 and asked him as to why he spoiled both our lives
wherein the Respondent No.1 replied that, “She is not answerable to
both of them at all” and the Respondent No.2 and Applicant no1 and 2
started harassing, physical tortured and called up Shekhar uncle
(Youngest brother of Applicant No.1) who stays in Malad and when he
came to matrimonial house wherein he too started threatening the
Respondent no.1 that, it is normal to have an affair and if you don’t like
than leave this home by leaving the Respondent No.2 to us and said
that, Once the Respondent tno.1 gives birth to child then it is open for
her to leave this home .
13) The Respondent no.1 further states that on 30/7/2012 the respondent
no.1 gave birth to baby boy at Satabdi Hospital and after three days of
delivery of the child the Applicant No.2 did not allowed the Respondent
no.1 for breast feeding her child as Applicant No.2 gave a futile reason
as the Respondent no.1 had “C Section” delivery therefore it is not good
for mother and child. The Respondent no.1 further states that, as the
Respondent no.1 was not supported and cared by her own mother
therefore the naming ceremony and name of the minor baby boy was
decided and was done by the Applicant No.2 only and all the Applicants
no1 and 2 wanted the Respondent no.1 to leave the matrimonial home
by leaving the minor child with the Applicant no1 and 2 as the
Applicants did not wanted me to have attachment with the minor child
“Rushi” and all the Applicants reminded the Respodentno.1 about the
deal that, sooner she gives birth then she will leave the minor child with
the Respondents and will leave the matrimonial house and go.
14) The respondent no.1 states that the Respondent no.1 was enjoying with
Sonali at different places like Mahableshwar, Goa, Vengurala,
Matheran, Alibarg and all the immoral activities were known to the
Applicant No.2 and indirectly she also promoted the immoral activities
of the son and when the respondent no.1 deliberately informed the
Applicant No.2 about continuing extra marital affair by the Respondent
No.1 with Sonali and showed the intimate photographs of the
Respondent No.1 with Sonali clicked at Matheran, Mahableshwar upon
this the Respondent No.2 instead of reprimanding the Respondent No.2
blamed the Responded no.1 herself by saying that, “when you can’t
satisfy your man that’s why the Respondent No.2 is going with other
women and that is not wrong at all and all she wants her son
(Respondent No.2) to be happy and Respondent No.2 is happy with
Sonali and the Respondent no.1 should leave her matrimonial home but
still applicant is staying in matrimonial home better applicant leave the
matrimonial home. Hereto mark and annexed a copy of the photos of
the extra Marital affair of the respondent no. 2 as Exhibit “A”
15) The respondent no.1 further states that the Respondent no.1 observed
that the Respondent No.2 was regularly staying out of the house for
longer time, staying out of town for 2 to 3 days and on 22/5/2018 all the
intimate photos of Respondent No.2 and Kavita Kale was shown to all
for Applicant no1 and 2 and relatives and the Respondent No.2 and
Kavita Kale were living in relationship since 2016 till date and the
Applicant No.1 and 2 and relatives agreed with their relationship.
16) The Respondent no.1 further states that the Applicant No.2 never
allowed the minor child to sleep with the Respondent no.1 and breast
feeding was restricted with an intention for not to develop the
dependency of the child upon the Respondent no.1 which was cruelly
treated the Respondent o.1 by separating the child with the respondent
no.1 and the respondent no.1 was helpless as she feared that, the
Applicant No.1 and 2 and Respondent no.2 had instilled fear in the
minor child’s mind that, if he sleep with me or drinks mother milk then
he will be sent to Boarding school therefore the minor baby child was
not even coming nearby the respondent no.1which cause tremendous
mental and emotional pain and she could not do anything as she was
helpless and there was none to support her and she felt lonely and
depressed.
17) The respondent no.1 further states that the Respondent no.1 filed so
many police complaint since 2018 to 2022 against respondent but no
action was taken. The copy of complaint against respondents is annexed
and marked as Exhibit “B”.
18) The Respondent no.1 states that Applicant no1 and 2 throw all things of
applicant and pressured to agree for divorce and used to say that
respondent no 2 kick on Respondent no.1 ass, throw out without any
alimony.
19) The Respondent no.1 further states that last year 2023 without
respondent no.1 concern responded tno.2 and Applicant no1 and 2 took
leaving certificate from son’s school. When my son told to Respondent
no.1 that they all are going to ratnagiri all the applicant no1 and 2 and
respondent no.2 came to his school for taking leaving certificate as soon
as Respondent no.1 went to school on next day and given a letter to
school authority that without respondent no.1concern no leaving
certificate has to furnish to respondents no.2 and Applicants no.1 and2.
20) The Respondent no.1 further states that Applicant no1 and2 used to lock
their rooms and belongings. The Photograph of Locked Door is annexed
and exhibited here as Exhibit “C”.
21) The Respondent No. 1 has filed a domestic violence complaint
against Respondent No. 2 and the applicants before the 26th Judicial
Magistrate First Class, and a notice has been issued by the Hon'ble
Court. The applicant further states that an interim application has also
been filed under Sections 12, 17, 18, 19, and 22 of the Domestic
Violence Act. The applicant is ready to produce a copy of the domestic
violence complaint as and when required by this Hon'ble Court. A copy
of case status of the matter is annexed and marked as Exhibit “D”.
22) The Respondent no.1 she is working is Private Company and drawing
the Salary of Rs 32,000/- (Rupees Thirty Two Thousand Only) per
month and out of which the Respondent No. 1 pays 5,000/- to Applicant
No. 1 & 2 i.e. father in Law and Mother in Law out of love and
affection. The Respondent no.1 further states that Respondent no.1 have
educational loan, which she paying per month E.M.I. and respondent
no.1 used to take care of herself and her son educational expenses too.
The respondent no.1 further states applicant no 1 and 2 receives Pension
per month and they have medical facilities too. The Respondent no.1
further states that Respondent no.2 has no labiality he is having
handsome monthly income and having property in native place too.
Applicant no 1 and 2 having own flat in Mumbai and house in native
place and also property too. The respondent no. 1 takes care of the
household expenses such as grocery, milk, vegetables and others
household expenses the respondent no. 1 further spend tuition fees,
school van fees, and the stationary required in the school of her son this
shows that the respondent no. is the prudent daughter in law and a
prudent wife who take care of the house after being a working woman.
Hereto marked and annexed here is the copy of the bank statement of
the Respondent No. 1 as Exhibit “E”.
23) The Respondent on.1 further states that the current flat where the
Applicants and Respondent stay together had been proposed for the
redevelopment, the Applicants no. 1 and 2 will shift to the native place
with the respondent No. 2 i.e. the son of the Applicants and the with the
Grandson without taking Respondent no.1.
24) That the applicants forum of senior citizens Tribunal is being
misused to throw the respondent no.1 out of her matrimonial house by
the Applicants with connivance of the Respondent No.2.
25) The complaint appears to be a result of Collusion between
Applicants and Respondent No.2, with the sole intention of evicting the
daughter-in-law from her matrimonial premises. This is evident as two
NCRs (Non-Cognizable Reports) have been filed by the Applicants
against the daughter-in-law but not against the son, clearly indicating
the biased and collusive nature of the complaints.
26) After filling of this complaint in October, 2023 the Applicants and
Respondent No. 2 had went out for a trip at various Places such at
Ujjain, Ratnagiri, and Kolhapur leaving respondent no. 2 alone in the
house, while they enjoyed their trip, also all the family function and the
outings are being enjoyed by the Applicants and the respondent No. 2
which clearly shows that the Respondent No. 2 has been added just for
the name sake. Instead, they have chosen this method to evict me from
my shared household with the collusion of Respondent No. 2.
27) I am paying the grocery bills, as evidenced by my bank statement,
which clearly shows that I have paid for the groceries used by me and
my family. I have also been paying the internet bills and taking care of
all necessary expenses for my family members, as shown by the bills
annexed with my reply. As a prudent wife, I have fulfilled all my
obligations towards my family, but despite my efforts, everything seems
to be in vain. I am a victim of circumstances, having done everything
for the family, yet they have filed this complaint against me to evict me
from my shared household. I have a strong case, as I have provided
evidence for each point in my reply, and I request that the same be
considered when deciding these proceedings.
28) There are quantum of apex courts and high courts judgments as
below:
1. Vimalben Ajitbhai Patel vs. Vatslaben Ashokbhai Patel & Ors.
(2008)
The Supreme Court held that a daughter-in-law cannot be evicted from
the matrimonial home, as it is her shared household under the Protection
of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. This case emphasizes
that the rights of the daughter-in-law to reside in the shared household
cannot be curtailed by an order of eviction from a senior citizen.
2. Taruna Batra vs. S.R. Batra & Anr. (2006)
The Supreme Court clarified that if a woman has been residing in her
matrimonial home, it is considered her "shared household," and she
cannot be forcibly evicted without following due legal process.
29. That in the case of Sanjivani jayesh Seernani vs. Kavita Shyam
Shernani & Ors, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court observed in Para No.
36 of the Judgement that:
“If Petitioner was to reside in a nuclear family with her husband in a
separate residence from her in-laws, Section 17 of DV Act would
protect her from being thrown out of the house owned by her husband.
However, where the wife stays in a joint family with her in- laws in a
house owned by her in-laws, would she be put to a disadvantageous
position by directing her ouster under the Senior Citizens Act in a
summary inquiry thereby frustrating her rights under Section 17 of the
DV Act? Does it mean that a wife staying separately from her in-laws
enjoys better protection than the one who chooses to reside in a joint
family with her in-laws? The answer to the question would obviously be
in the negative. Therefore, where a situation arises when a contest is
noticed between the rights of senior citizens under the Senior Citizens
Act and of a women under DV Act, balancing act needs to be done and
the rights of senior citizens cannot be decided in isolation.”
Hereto mark and annexed a copy of the Judgment passed by the
Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Sanjivani jayesh Seernani vs. Kavita
Shyam Shernani & Ors as Exhibit “F”.
30. That in the case of S. Vanitha vs. Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru
Urban District & Ors. (2020), the Hon’ble Apex Court has observed in
the Judgement that:
“That the rights of the daughter-in-law under the Domestic Violence
Act, 2005, to reside in the shared household cannot be overridden by an
order passed under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior
Citizens Act, 2007. The court held that both statutes need to be
harmoniously interpreted, and eviction of the daughter-in-law cannot
be ordered solely based on the senior citizens' claim.”
Hereto mark and annexed a copy of the Judgment passed by the
Hon’ble Apex Court in S. Vanitha vs. Deputy Commissioner,
Bengaluru Urban District & Ors. (2020) as Exhibit “G”.
29) THE RESPONDENT NO.1 THEREFORE PRAYS THAT :
A) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to dismiss the case as
filed by the applicants herein above with Compensatory Cost.
B) Any other order be passed in the interest of Justice as this
Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper.
Date: 05/09/2024 Respondent No.1
BEFORE THE HON’BLE SENIOR CITIZEN
MAINTENANCE TRIBUNAL AT BANDRA,
MUMBAI.
SR NO. 150 of 2023
1) Mr. Suresh Parshuram Shelar )
2) Mrs. Mahananda Suresh Shelar ) … Applicants
Versus
1) Mrs. Madhura Prashant Shelar )
2) Mr. Prashant Suresh Shelar ) …Respondents
REPLY/WRITTEN STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF
THE RESPONDENT NO.1.
Dated this ____ day of _________, 2024