Russia (bbabo.net), - A court in the Tyumen region did not allow a local resident to put her hated roommate on the street. The apartment has not been privatized, and since the woman owner once registered a gentleman at home, she must endure the hardships of family life.

“The Sladkovsky District Court refused to Ekaterina S. to evict her cohabitant from a municipal apartment in the village of Stepnoe and remove him from the registration register,” the joint press service of the courts of the Tyumen region reported. “The lady motivated her appeal to the court by the fact that relations with her cohabitant deteriorated. He abuses alcohol, makes scandals, insults her. The plaintiff and the defendant do not have jointly acquired property, they do not run a common household. "

But once upon a time everything was completely different. The woman loved and trusted so much that she shared with the most secret - registration.

"Earlier, she moved her cohabitant into the apartment as a family member, and they must bear all the costs of maintaining the living quarters in equal shares," the court stressed.

In a sense, the court did not allow the woman to break the love boat on everyday life. More precisely, to finish it off. We do not know what kind of reefs the boat of love ran into in this case: the reefs of the sofa and the TV, the rocks of alcoholism, the shallows of indifference, etc. But their joint registration binds them more tightly than a stamp in a passport could. Therefore, apparently, in grief and joy to be together in the same kitchen.

Of course, no court has the right to lock a woman within four walls alone with a rude and rowdy. The one who raises his hand - whether to loved ones, to unloved ones, it doesn't matter - must answer according to the law. However, in this case there is a problem: there were no official complaints against the partner.

The facts of domestic scandals had to be recorded: call the police, file complaints

“The hostess did not apply to law enforcement agencies on the facts of hooliganism of a citizen,” they continue in court. “At the court session, the defendant did not recognize the claims and stated that he had no other housing. grounds".

That is, if you call a spade, the court did not believe the tears of a woman, but believed the tears of her ex-lover. And it's not a matter of hostility to the female sex. In this situation, it was the woman who had to confirm the validity of her tears. It was enough for the cavalier to point to the cloudy sky and say that he had nowhere to go.

“Under the law, family members of a tenant of residential premises under a social tenancy agreement have equal rights and obligations with the tenant,” explained the joint press service of the regional courts. residential premises, he retains the same rights as the tenant and members of his family have. The specified citizen is independently responsible for his obligations arising from the relevant social contract of employment. "

Perhaps he really is such a scoundrel as she described. However, the facts of domestic scandals must be recorded: call the police, file a complaint.

Then it would be a completely different conversation with a citizen in court. In the meantime, the lady can only share the utility bill with him.

bbabo.Net