JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. Shivan Desai for the Petitioner and Mr. S. N. Joshi for the Respondent.

2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith with the consent of and at the request of the learned Counsel for the parties.

3. This Petition challenges the order dated 22/12/2020 made by the Maintenance Tribunal constituted under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (said Act).

4. In the present case, it is not necessary to go into the issue as to whether the impugned order is appealable at the instance of the Petitioner or not. This is because the impugned order, in the present case, is bereft of any reasons. The Presiding Officer has simply observed that the replies filed on behalf of the present Petitioner are not satisfactory and deserved to be rejected. Based on this finding, the impugned order has been made directing the Petitioner to hand over the possession of the shop and the residential house to the Respondent, in addition to maintenance of Rs. 10,000/-.

5. Since, there are no reasons whatsoever in the impugned order, on this short ground the impugned order is required to be set aside and is, hereby, set aside. Absence of reasons whatsoever also amounts to