The Bombay High Court ruled that an under-construction flat, even if jointly registered in the names of both spouses, cannot be treated as a “shared household” under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. Justice Manjusha Deshpande held that the couple never resided in the flat. The possession had not been handed over, the wife could not claim relief under Section 19 of the DV Act. The Court observed that directing the husband to pay instalments or asking the employer to deduct the amount from his salary was not justified. The wife’s claim did not fall under any of the reliefs provided under the DV Act. The property was not occupied by either party and was still under construction. The case stemmed from the wife’s plea challenging Magistrate. Also Sessions Court orders refusing to direct the husband to pay for the Malad flat.
The husband argued that the flat was never used as a residence. Agreeing with him, the High Court dismissed the wife’s plea. Thus confirming that a flat not yet occupied cannot be considered a “shared household” under Section 2(s) of the Act.
