Point of Law: It cannot be executed in terms of Section 11 of the Act. As per Section 22 of the Senior Citizens Act, the District Magistrates are conferred with powers to ensure compliance with the provisions of the Act.

JUDGMENT

“To care for those who once cared for us is one of the highest honours”.- Tia Walker.

The Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as 'Senior Citizens Act') provides for the maintenance and welfare of parents and senior citizens guaranteed and recognized under Article 41 of the Constitution of India. The Senior Citizens Act casts obligation on the relative or children to maintain a senior citizen or a parent who is unable to maintain himself/herself, to lead a normal life. The right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution includes right to live with human dignity. The object of Senior Citizens Act is to maintain parents and senior citizens to lead a life with dignity.

2. If the parent is able to maintain herself from her own earnings, but the son has obstructed the parent to have access to her earnings, can the Maintenance Tribunal constituted under the Senior Citizens Act direct the son not to obstruct the parent from taking the earnings and to create a peaceful living atmosphere for her in the residence? Enforceability of such an order of the Maintenance Tribunal is the issue involved in this writ petition.

3. The petitioner, a senior citizen, is the wife of Sri. K.V. Eapen who had executed Ext.P2 Will dated 10.10.2008, whereby life interest was created in favour of the petitioner in respect of A schedule properties in the Will, and after her death, the property is to devolve absolutely in favour of their son, the 4th respondent. As per the recital in Ext. P2 Will, during the life time of the petitioner, she can enjoy A schedule properties with absolute freedom including the right to collect and take all income and to reside in the house ad libitum.

4. Seven months after the execution of the Will, Sri. K.V. Eapen passed away and five years thereafter, the petitioner preferred an application before the Maintenance Tribunal under the Senior Citizens Act against the 4th respondent son and the 5th respondent daughter in law, alleging that they are not maintaining her and are not permitting her and her mother in law to stay in the house peacefully and to enjoy or collect usufructs from the property covered by the Will. The application of the petitioner is not produced in the writ petition; but, on a reading of the order passed by the Maintenance Tribunal, it can be seen that the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs before the Maintenance Tribunal:-

“(i) to ensure a peaceful living for her and her mother in law in the house,

(ii) the right to take usufructs from the property, (iii) the right to sell the agricultural products yielded during the life time of her husband,

(iv) protection for life from son and daughter in law.”

5. The 5th respondent daughter in law entered appearance before the Maintenance Tribunal and resisted the application and contended that they have not caused any obstruction to the petitioner staying in the house or in utilizing the income from the property. The allegation that they have harassed the petitioner was denied and on the contrary, it was contended that it is the petitioner who used to harass her.

6. The Maintenance Tribunal passed Ext. P1 order directing respondents 4 and 5 (i) not to obstruct the petitioner from taking usufructs from the property (ii) to create a peaceful living atmosphere for the petitioner in the house, and (iii) not to cause any harm to the petitioner.

7. Six months thereafter, the petitioner approached the Tribunal by Ext. P3 application for enforcement of Ext. P1 order contending that, in spite of Ext. P1 order passed by the Maintenance Tribunal, respondents 4 and 5 continued to harass the petitioner and obstruct her from entering the house and taking usufructs. The petitioner contends that the Maintenance Tribunal has not taken any steps to enforce Ext. P1 order and the District Magistrate has not taken any steps to perform the duties imposed on them under Rule 19 (1) and (2) of the Kerala Maintenance and Welfare