According to the trial, Zhao, Wang and Xiao Tao are not the applicants of the homestead where the demolished houses are located, and they have not contributed to the housing construction, so they do not enjoy the ownership of the demolished houses. According to the standards stipulated in the relocation and vacating plan of this case, the relocated building that replaces the homestead area should be owned by the vacatee. However, Wang and Xiao Tao are residents of * * * specified in the demolition agreement, and they should enjoy corresponding rights to the compensation for demolition. Accordingly, the court ruled that Wang and Xiao Tao received more than 200,000 yuan in compensation for demolition and rejected other demands. During the period of marriage, the benefits of demolition that the divorced woman can share are mainly distributed according to the specific demolition policy, demolition agreement and the contribution of the woman to the reconstruction and expansion of the demolished house after marriage, taking into account other factors such as the duration of husband and wife's marriage.
Before the house purchase index was occupied, the daughter-in-law advocated compensation and was supported. Ms. Wu and Mr. Dou are husband and wife, and they have a daughter adzuki bean. They divorced on 20 14. In 2006, the house on Mr. Dou's father's homestead was demolished, and he signed a retirement agreement as a retiree. Mr. Dou and Ms. Wu's parents were resettled in the agreement. Demolition is based on the actual population of retirees, and the resettlement area is calculated according to the construction area of 45 square meters per person. Mr. Dou later purchased two sets of resettlement houses with the area of 1 19.42 m2 and 93.39 m2 respectively.
Resettlement houses enjoy the corresponding preferential purchase indicators. What is vacated on the same homestead can only be placed together, but Ms. Wu did not explicitly give up her purchase index, and Mr. Dou's parents did use some of Ms. Wu's purchase index when actually purchasing the resettlement house, but the purchase index she enjoyed for purchasing the resettlement house was not enough to enjoy the exclusive right to use the disputed house, so the court did not support her claim for the exclusive right to use the disputed house. However, considering that the purchase index is a preferential condition for buying a house, including a certain property value, in order to reduce the litigation of the parties, according to the actual use of the purchase index of Ms. Wu's resettlement house, the court ruled that Mr. Dou's parents Xiao Dou should make corresponding discount compensation. Accordingly, the court ruled that Ms. Wu received compensation of 6.5438+0.5 million yuan for demolition and rejected other demands.