Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Shri Sambhaji Balkrishna Zambre, challenged the order dated 23/09/2025 passed by the Appellate Officer, Senior Citizens Welfare Tribunal and District Magistrate, Sangli, in Appeal No. Jeshtha Nagrik Appeal/SR-01/2025, which dismissed his appeal and endorsed the order of the Presiding Officer, Senior Citizen Welfare Tribunal, in Application No. MAG/J.Na./SR/20/2022. The parties are mother (respondent) and son (petitioner). The dispute concerns the estate left by the petitioner's father who died on 02-06-2007, including properties such as Revision Survey No. 159 in Kupwad and various City Survey numbers in Sangli. The petitioner claimed these were ancestral and self-acquired assets. After the father's death, the petitioner's two sisters executed a registered relinquishment deed in 2013, followed by the respondent-mother executing a registered relinquishment deed. The respondent, a senior citizen, sought maintenance and protection of her property rights under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. The Tribunal and Appellate Officer concurrently found in favor of the respondent. The High Court, after hearing both sides, found no merit in the petition, upheld the concurrent findings, and dismissed the petition with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 - Sections 4, 23 - Senior Citizens Welfare Tribunal - Appellate jurisdiction - The dispute pertained to property rights and maintenance between a mother (senior citizen) and her son - The Tribunal and Appellate Officer concurrently found that the mother was entitled to maintenance and protection of her property rights - The High Court upheld the concurrent findings, dismissing the petition - Held that the orders of the Tribunal and Appellate Officer were just and proper, and no interference was warranted (Paras 1-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order passed by the Appellate Officer, Senior Citizens Welfare Tribunal, dismissing the appeal and endorsing the order of the Presiding Officer, is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the orders of the Tribunal and Appellate Officer. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act
- 2007
- Sections 4
- 23
- Senior Citizens Welfare Tribunal
- Appellate jurisdiction
- Concurrent findings
- Relinquishment deed
- Right to maintenance
- Property rights
Case Details
2026 LawText (BOM) (05) 78
Writ Petition No. 12120 of 2025
Mr. Prashant Bhavake, advocate for the Petitioner; Mr. Suryajeet P. Chavan, advocate for the Respondent
Shri Sambhaji Balkrishna Zambre
Smt. Chhaya Balkrishna Zambre
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging the order of the Appellate Officer, Senior Citizens Welfare Tribunal, dismissing the appeal and endorsing the order of the Presiding Officer in a maintenance and property dispute under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner sought to quash the order dated 23/09/2025 passed by the Appellate Officer, Senior Citizens Welfare Tribunal and District Magistrate, Sangli, and the order of the Presiding Officer, Senior Citizen Welfare Tribunal.
Filing Reason
The petitioner was aggrieved by the concurrent findings of the Tribunal and Appellate Officer which upheld the respondent-mother's claim for maintenance and property rights.
Previous Decisions
The Presiding Officer, Senior Citizen Welfare Tribunal, passed an order in Application No. MAG/J.Na./SR/20/2022 in favor of the respondent. The Appellate Officer, Senior Citizens Welfare Tribunal, dismissed the petitioner's appeal in Appeal No. Jeshtha Nagrik Appeal/SR-01/2025 on 23/09/2025.
Issues
Whether the order of the Appellate Officer, Senior Citizens Welfare Tribunal, dismissing the appeal and endorsing the order of the Presiding Officer, is sustainable in law.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner argued that the properties were ancestral and self-acquired, and that the respondent had executed a registered relinquishment deed.
The respondent contended that she was a senior citizen entitled to maintenance and protection of her property rights under the Act.
Ratio Decidendi
The concurrent findings of the Tribunal and Appellate Officer under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, are just and proper, and no interference is warranted in writ jurisdiction.
Judgment Excerpts
Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of the parties. Petition is decided finally at admission stage.
The litigating parties are deeply interconnected yet stand as two opposing sides. The Respondent is the aged mother of the Petitioner, and the dispute pertains to the estate left behind by the Petitioner’s father who passed away on 02-06-2007.
Procedural History
The respondent filed an application before the Presiding Officer, Senior Citizen Welfare Tribunal, which was allowed. The petitioner appealed to the Appellate Officer, Senior Citizens Welfare Tribunal, who dismissed the appeal on 23/09/2025. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition before the High Court.
Acts & Sections
- Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007: Sections 4, 23
