Eviction under the Senior Citizens Act requires a valid maintenance claim; the Tribunal lacks authority for eviction in the absence of such a claim.

JUDGMENT :

(PARTHA SARTHY, J.)

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State of Bihar.

Re: I. A. no. 1 of 2024

2. The instant interlocutory application has been filed by the appellant praying for condoning the delay of 17 days in filing of the instant appeal.

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that against the order dated 28.3.2024, while the limitation expired on 27.4.2024, the appeal was filed after a delay of 17 days ie on 14.5.2024. It was submitted that the delay was not intentional. In fact, the appeal is in time taking into consideration the date of uploading of the judgment.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the contents of the petition, the Court is satisfied that the appellant has made out a case for condonation of delay. The delay is condoned.

5. I. A. no. 1 of 2024 is allowed.

Re: LPA no. 528 of 2024

6. The instant appeal has been preferred by the writ respondent no.6-appellant against the judgment dated 28.3.2024 whereby the learned Single Judge was pleased to allow CWJC no.17149 of 2023 filed by the writ petitioners-respondent nos. 6 to 10 and set aside the order dated 25.8.2023 passed by the Collector-cum-District Magistrate, Patna in Maintenance of Parents Appeal Case No. 03/2020-21.

7. The subject matter of the property in dispute is a four storey house bearing House No. 19 in Montessori School Lane, Boring Road under Police Station Sri Krishna Puri in the town of Patna.

8. The husband of the writ respondent no.6-appellant Late Lalit Lal had three sons and two daughters namely Anil Prakash (writ petitioner no.1), Arun Prakash (writ petitioner no.4), Amar Prakash, Arti Prakash and Jyoti Prakash. The writ petitioner nos. 2 and 3 happen to be the wife and son of Anil Prakash while the writ petitioner no.5 is the wife of Arun Prakash. As a result of dispute between the parties, the writ petitioner nos. 1 and 4 filed Title Partition Suit no.179/2019 on 16.7.2019 in the Court of learned Sub Judge-I, Patna against their father Sri Lalit Lal and others praying therein for a preliminary decree of partition with respect to their 2/6 share (1/6 each) in property described in Schedule-1 to Schedule-5 of the plaint and for other reliefs. It may be mentioned here itself that Schedule-3 of the plaint in the title suit is the House no.19 situated at Patna in Montessori School Lane, the subject matter of the instant case.

9. It is the case of the writ petitioners that Amar Prakash got the writ respondent no.6 to file Case no. 72/2019 before the Sub Divisional Officer, Patna Sadar-cum-Chairman, Tribunal. The case of the writ respondent no.6 was that the house was constructed out of the personal earnings of her husband. As the writ petitioners were continuously fighting, as such it was prayed that they be evicted from the said house so that the writ respondent no.6 along with her husband can live peacefully in the self-acquired house of her husband. Notices were issued in the said case to the writ petitioners who filed their response. By order dated 14.3.2020, the Chairman, Tribunal-cum-Sub Divisional Officer, Patna Sadar was pleased to observe that the contesting parties were mother and son and the dispute between them related to the house at Patna. He observed that it was not appropriate for the writ respondent no.6 to stop the supply of water over a family dispute. As such, the writ respondent no.6 was directed to provide uninterrupted supply of water to the writ petitioners and