Can a senior citizen have a daughter-in-law removed from the house through the summary machinery of the Senior Citizens Act, even while the daughter-in-law's domestic violence case asserting a right of residence is pending? In Punam v. Divisional Commissioner, GNCT of Delhi & Ors. (W.P.(C) 11683/2022, decided 30 September 2026), a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court — Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia — upheld both the eviction power in the Delhi Rules of 2009 and the specific eviction order passed against the petitioner.
The dispute
The petitioner married in 1996 and lived in her mother-in-law’s house. After matrimonial discord surfaced, she filed proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 in 2018, asserting, among other things, a right to reside in the shared household. The mother-in-law, a senior citizen, moved the machinery created by the Delhi Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2009, seeking the daughter-in-law’s eviction on the ground of ill-treatment and non-maintenance.
The District Magistrate declined the eviction application, but the Divisional Commissioner allowed the appeal and directed eviction. The daughter-in-law then challenged both the eviction order and the vires of Rule 22(3)(1) itself before the High Court, contending that the eviction procedure travelled beyond the parent Act of 2007 and collided with her statutory right of residence under Section 17 of the DV Act.
Two questions, two answers
Yes. The Division Bench held that Rule 22(3)(1)(i) and (iv) of the 2009 Rules fall within the rule-making power under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, read with the protective purpose of the statute. Eviction, the Court reasoned, can be an incident of enforcement of a senior citizen’s right to protection and maintenance — a view consistent with the Supreme Court’s treatment of tribunals’ powers under the Act.
Yes. On the facts — findings of ill-treatment, the petitioner’s own employment and the availability of separate accommodation — the Bench sustained the Divisional Commissioner’s order. The senior citizen’s right to reside peacefully in her own property prevailed.
Harmonising two overriding statutes
The judgment confronts a recurring conflict in Delhi litigation. Section 17 of the DV Act gives every woman in a domestic relationship the right to reside in the shared household; Section 3 of the Senior Citizens Act declares that the 2007 Act overrides other enactments. Each statute carries a non-obstante clause, so neither can simply be read as trumping the other.
The shared-household right under the DV Act protects her occupation; a summary eviction under delegated legislation cannot defeat a statutory right conferred by Parliament.
The two regimes must be construed harmoniously. The residence right is real but not indefeasible: where ill-treatment of the senior citizen is established and the facts (employment, alternative accommodation) permit, eviction from the senior citizen’s property is lawful, leaving the woman’s monetary and other DV Act remedies intact.
This approach follows the line of Supreme Court authority on the interplay of the two Acts, which rejects both extremes — neither an automatic eviction power that nullifies the DV Act, nor a residence right so absolute that an ill-treated senior citizen becomes a prisoner of litigation in her own home.
Practice notes for Delhi matters
This judgment is a Division Bench ruling that also sustains the validity of the Delhi eviction rules themselves, which earlier decisions had approached in varying ways. Anyone advising on a shared-household dispute in Delhi involving a senior citizen’s property should read the full text before taking a position, and remember that outcomes remain intensely fact-dependent.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a senior citizen seek eviction of a family member in Delhi?
Yes. Rule 22(3)(1) of the Delhi Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2009 provides a procedure for a senior citizen to seek eviction from self-acquired property on grounds of non-maintenance and ill-treatment. The Delhi High Court has now upheld these provisions as within the rule-making power conferred by the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.
Does a pending DV Act case stop an eviction under the Senior Citizens Act?
Not automatically. Both statutes contain overriding clauses, so the Court held they must be read harmoniously: the right of residence under Section 17 of the DV Act is not an indefeasible right to insist on living in that particular house, especially where ill-treatment of the senior citizen is found and the facts justify eviction.
Who decides eviction applications by senior citizens in Delhi?
Under the Delhi Rules, the application is processed through the District Magistrate, with an appellate remedy before the Divisional Commissioner. Orders of these authorities can be tested before the Delhi High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, as happened in this case.
Does eviction end the daughter-in-law's other remedies?
No. Monetary claims, maintenance, and other reliefs under the DV Act or matrimonial law survive. The eviction question concerns occupation of the senior citizen's property; it does not decide maintenance, stridhan or custody issues, which continue before the competent forums.