Why Make Life Hellish for Your Parents?
November 30 2016 By Abiodun Giwa
A high court in India has said that no adult son has any right to live in his father's house. And if the parents allow it, it should be for mercy and not a right.
Therefore, forcing parents to do so mean making life a hell for them, and they have the right to reject it.
The court's decision follows dismissal of an appeal by a man and his wife, challenging the order of a trial court, which according to the India Times' report, has decided in favor of the parents, that their son and daughter-in-law, vacate floors in the parent's house.
“Where the house is a self-acquired house of the parents, son whether married or unmarried, has no legal right to live in that house and he can live in that house only at the mercy of his parents up to the time the parents allow,” Justice Pratibha Rani said.
The court said that it is not right for a son to believe because his parents permits him to live in the house, because the relationship between them was cordial, should not mean that the parents have to bare responsibilities for his upkeep, throughout his life.
The court's decision was reportedly taken after the court had ascertained that the house belongs to the parents and that their son had not co-ownership with them.
The immediate question this story has attracted is why must a man taken so much liberty to make life a hell for his parents? Why should a married man force himself to live with his parents with his wife and other baggage, and at the expense of the parents? Is there any clime under the sun, where it is a culture making it a right for a man to continue living with his parents, along with his wife and child, and for the parents to continue shouldering his burden?
Therefore, forcing parents to do so mean making life a hell for them, and they have the right to reject it.
The court's decision follows dismissal of an appeal by a man and his wife, challenging the order of a trial court, which according to the India Times' report, has decided in favor of the parents, that their son and daughter-in-law, vacate floors in the parent's house.
“Where the house is a self-acquired house of the parents, son whether married or unmarried, has no legal right to live in that house and he can live in that house only at the mercy of his parents up to the time the parents allow,” Justice Pratibha Rani said.
The court said that it is not right for a son to believe because his parents permits him to live in the house, because the relationship between them was cordial, should not mean that the parents have to bare responsibilities for his upkeep, throughout his life.
The court's decision was reportedly taken after the court had ascertained that the house belongs to the parents and that their son had not co-ownership with them.
The immediate question this story has attracted is why must a man taken so much liberty to make life a hell for his parents? Why should a married man force himself to live with his parents with his wife and other baggage, and at the expense of the parents? Is there any clime under the sun, where it is a culture making it a right for a man to continue living with his parents, along with his wife and child, and for the parents to continue shouldering his burden?
