Case Brief: Widow’s Right to Reside in Matrimonial Home

Bombay-High-Court

Case Title

Unnamed Widow v. Elder Brother of Deceased Husband
(Bombay High Court, September 2025)

Bombay High Court
Single Judge Bench: Justice Urmila Joshi Phalke

The petitioner is a 43-year-old widow from Nagpur.
After marriage, she stayed with her husband in the family house but later shifted to Pune in 2004 due to family issues.
Her husband began constructing a flat on the first floor of the house in 2007, based on a will left by his mother.
The ground floor was occupied by her husband’s elder brother and his family.
Her husband passed away in January 2008, leaving the construction incomplete.
The brother-in-law refused to accommodate the widow and her teenage son.
The widow approached the magistrate court under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act) and obtained protection to live in the shared household.
The Sessions Court upheld this order in August 2022.
The brother-in-law then challenged the order in the Bombay High Court, arguing that the widow had not resided in the house for years and hence it was not a “shared household.”

Whether a widow can claim the right to reside in her matrimonial house even if she has not lived there recently or continuously.
Whether preventing her from residing in the shared household amounts to domestic violence under the DV Act.

Section 17 – Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005

Guarantees a woman’s right to reside in her shared household, irrespective of her legal interest or title.
Restraining her from residence amounts to domestic violence.

Petitioner (Brother-in-law):

Claimed the house could not be called a shared household as the widow had not lived there since 2004.
Denied her right to claim residence in the ground floor portion occupied by him.

Respondent (Widow):

Asserted her right under Section 17 of the DV Act to reside in her matrimonial house.
Claimed she and her son were being unlawfully restrained from their rightful home.

The Bombay High Court dismissed the petition and upheld the lower court’s order.

A woman’s right to reside in her matrimonial house is protected under Section 17 of the DV Act, regardless of whether she currently lives there or not.
Stopping or restraining a woman from living in her shared household amounts to domestic violence.
She cannot be evicted if she already resides there, nor can she be excluded from the house if she wishes to enter and reside.

Reinforces women’s housing rights after marriage.
Expands the interpretation of “shared household” to include property where she has a right to reside, not just where she currently lives.
Provides an important precedent for domestic violence cases involving right of residence.
A key case for law students studying women’s rights under DV Act and family law disputes.