The property belongs to the mother in law as the papers are in her name. Now she can dispose the property as she likes as it is not an ancestral property and hence nobody has a right over it.

Property cannot be sold without the express written consent of all share holder that is daughter in law, her son and four daughters. Daughter in law can restrain mother in law from  transferring, selling or gifting the property. To start with issue a public notice  in local news paper warning general public from purchasing the property without consent of every share holder. This will discourage any potential purchaser from buying the property. You can also file a suit for partition and separate of property seeking stay against transfer of property by her. You will get separate possession and your share in the property.

She can't get a stay order for self acquired property of her mother in law unless it a joint property

daughter in law has no share in property standing in mother in law name during mother in law lifetime 

2) mother in law should approach senior citizen tribunal to direct daughter in law to vacate house portion in her possession 

- If the property is in the name of Mother-in-law (Widow) , then it will considered as self acquired property and hence she can sell the entire property or she can transfer that property to anyone without taking consent of any of the legal heirs including daughter-in-law(widow)

- However, the daughter-in-law(widow) is having right to claim the residential right from her in-laws after the demise of her husband , but she cannot get stay against selling the property. 

Dear client I am sorry to hear that but daughter-in-law can claim the property from mother in law as her share in consequence of being wife of her son and she has full right over than ancientral property. 

Mother in law is absolute owner of property 

she can sell the property standing in her name without consent of her legal heirs 

distribution is fair and reasonable 

The widow daughter in law do not have any rights in the property belonging to her mother in law. 

The mother in law can dispose the property as per her own will and wish. 

The daughter or the daughter in law or any third person do not have any rights in the property belonging to the mother in law. 

The daughter in law cannot obtain any relief from court because she has no rights in that property. 

Yes she has all the rights in the same. 

D-I-L cannot get stay order as the MIL is the sole owner of this property and she can dispose of the property in any manner she deems fit.

D-I-L has no share in this property.

D-I-L has no merits to get a stay order in the facts of this case

- As I mentioned above that the daughter-in-law cannot get stay order from the court , if the property is the self acquired property of mother-in-law during her life time. 

- Further , the mother-in-law having her right to transfer the said property to anyone as per her wish and even to sell the property without taking consent of others including daughter-in-law. 

After the death of her husband even wife has the right to hold certain share of property in this case since your mother in law is holding some property for herself and distributing rest among her children it's totally fair in the eye of law.

Hello,

A daughter-in-law has no right in her mother-in-law’s sef acquired property.

Self-acquired property includes property the mother-in-law bought for herself, inherited as an heir, received as a gift, or acquired under a Will.

If this is your self-acquired property as you seem to suggest, your daughter-in-law has no claim to it. You can sell or gift the property in your lifetime to anyone. In case you want to give the property to one or more persons after you are gone, you are free to have a Will prepared to that effect.

Fairness is not something any court will go into. It is your property and you are free to do whatever you want with it. The law is not concerned with that aspect. 

As for a stay, courts are slow to pass such orders in cases involving property disputes. This is because any sale of property during the pendency of the case is subject to its outcome. This is a sufficient safeguard. It is a legal doctrine called lis pendens. In simple words, anyone who buys the property during the dispute will have to comply with the final decision of the court. If the court says the seller was not the owner for example, the buyer will have no claim to the property. It will go to the winning side.

Hope that answers your question. Follow-up queries welcome.