Upholding Son Eviction Home Court Mother 93 Right To Live Peace

Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad was hearing a writ petition filed by Devendra Khanna, 65, and his wife Neerja. The couple had challenged orders passed by the Bilaspur Maintenance Tribunal and the District Magistrate-cum-Appellate Tribunal directing them to vacate the first floor of a family house after a complaint by Devendra’s mother, Santosh Khanna, under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.

“A senior citizen who is financially secure may yet be subjected to harassment, coercion, abuse or unlawful interference in her residence by her children or relatives,” the court said on July 2, adding that it would be against the Act’s intention if she is left without solution in such a situation “merely because she does not seek a quantified amount of monthly maintenance” from the son.

The son had argued that his mother was financially independent because she received a pension and had not sought monthly maintenance. He also disputed her ownership of the property. Rejecting these arguments, the high court held that the Senior Citizens Act is a welfare legislation intended to protect elderly persons from harassment and ensure they can live peacefully amid pending ownership disputes before civil or revenue authorities.

The petitioners opposed the proceedings, arguing that the dispute was essentially over property ownership and not maintenance. They claimed that one portion of the property had been purchased by the daughter-in-law Neerja before her marriage and that ownership issues could only be decided by a civil court. They also alleged that the proceedings had been initiated at the instance of Devendra’s younger brother to dispossess them.

The tribunal directed the couple to vacate the premises on September 12, 2024. Their appeal was dismissed on November 25, 2024, prompting them to move the high court.

Finding no jurisdictional error or perversity in the findings of the Maintenance Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal, the high court dismissed the writ petition and upheld the eviction order. It also underlined that the Senior Citizens Act existed to protect elderly citizens’ dignity, security and right to live peacefully in their own homes.

Vineet Upadhyay is an Assistant Editor with The Indian Express, where he leads specialized coverage of the Indian judicial system. Expertise Specialized Legal Authority: Vineet has spent the better part of his career analyzing the intricacies of the law. His expertise lies in "demystifying" judgments from the Supreme Court of India, various High Courts, and District Courts. His reporting covers a vast spectrum of legal issues, including: Constitutional & Civil Rights: Reporting on landmark rulings regarding privacy, equality, and state accountability. Criminal Justice & Enforcement: Detailed coverage of high-profile cases involving the Enforcement Directorate (ED), NIA, and POCSO matters. Consumer Rights & Environmental Law: Authoritative pieces on medical negligence compensation, environmental protection (such as the "living person" status of rivers), and labor rights. Over a Decade of Professional Experience: Prior to joining The Indian Express, he served as a Principal Correspondent/Legal Reporter for The Times of India and held significant roles at The New Indian Express. His tenure has seen him report from critical legal hubs, including Delhi and Uttarakhand. ... Read More