Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from two writ petitions filed by the son and grandson of an 89-year-old grandmother challenging an order of the Senior Citizens Tribunal, Mumbai, which allowed the grandmother's application under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. The grandmother alleged that after her husband's death in 2017, her son Jayesh along with his family forcibly moved into her flat and subjected her to continuous harassment and violence to coerce her into transferring all her assets solely in his name, to the exclusion of her two daughters. She claimed she was forced to leave her own flat and seek refuge with her daughter. Jayesh also filed a criminal case against her under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The grandmother sought eviction of Jayesh and her grandson Abhimanyu from the flat, return of her assets, and maintenance. Before the Tribunal, Abhimanyu contested the application, claiming ownership of the flat under his grandfather's will and questioned the grandmother's signatures, while Jayesh initially resisted but later, through his counsel, stated he had no objection to vacating the flat. The Tribunal found that the property stood in the grandmother's name, she was a senior citizen who had been driven out, and it was in her interest to regain possession. Accordingly, by order dated 30 July 2021, the Tribunal directed the eviction of Jayesh and Abhimanyu, to be executed after the vacation of an interim stay granted in a suo motu PIL due to COVID-19. Aggrieved, both filed writ petitions. The High Court of Bombay noted the harassment and the erosion of family values, observing that Abhimanyu's contentions were baseless and reflected a lack of respect. The court held that under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, the grandmother had a clear right to reside in her own house and be free from harassment. Jayesh's fair stand to vacate indicated he had no legal defence. The court dismissed both petitions and upheld the Tribunal's order, thereby affirming the grandmother's right to restoration of her property and a peaceful life.
Headnote
A) Senior Citizens - Right to Residence - Protection from Harassment - Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 - The Tribunal had jurisdiction to order eviction of the son and grandson from the grandmother's flat to protect her right to residence and to end harassment she suffered from them. Held: The eviction order is justified and in consonance with the objects of the Act. (Paras 7-8) B) Senior Citizens - Eviction of Children - Ownership Rights - Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 - The son and grandson had no legal right to occupy the grandmother's flat; the grandmother's right as owner and senior citizen prevails. The grandson's claim of ownership under a will was not accepted at this stage, and the son's concession to vacate demonstrated absence of any legal right. (Paras 5, 8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the eviction order passed by the Senior Citizens Tribunal directing the eviction of the petitioner-son and grandson from the grandmother's flat was justified under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.
Final Decision
Both writ petitions are dismissed. The impugned order of the Senior Citizens Tribunal dated 30 July 2021 is upheld, directing eviction of the petitioners from the grandmother's flat and restoration of her residence and other rights.
Law Points
- Legal points not extracted
- Senior citizen's right to reside in own house
- protection from harassment
- eviction of children from property
- Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act
- 2007
- right to maintenance
- senior citizens' tribunal jurisdiction
