JUDGMENT

Mohammad Rafiq, J. - This appeal on behalf of appellants no. l and 3, Rakesh Soni S/o Shri Leeladhar Soni and Smt. Anju Devi W/o Shri Rakesh Soni, challenges the order dated 02.05.2019 of learned Single Judge, whereby their writ petition filed assailing the order dated 25.05.2018 of the Tribunal constituted under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, has been dismissed.

2. Respondents no. l and 2, namely, Smt. Premlata Soni and Leeladhar Soni, are wife and husband. Appellants no. l and 2, namely, Rakesh Soni and Smt. Anju Devi are respectively their son and daughter-in-law.

3. The Tribunal constituted under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, (hereinafter shall be referred to as 'the Tribunal'), on the application filed by the respondents (father and mother) under Section 5 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizen Act, 2007, directed the appellants (son and daughter-in-law) to handover vacant possession of the house by 30.09.2018 and further restrained them not to torture respondents either mentally, physically or socially.

4. The respondents filed the said application under Section 5 of the Act of 2007 before the Tribunal against the appellants as also Vikas Soni and Yogita Devi (their another son and daughter-in-law), inter alia, with the pleadings that they are senior citizens and have been residing in their House No.984, Tansukh Shrimal Ki Gali, Near Ghile-ka-Kuwa, Takur Achrol Ka Rasta, Chaukri Ramchandra Ji, Jaipur. It was stated that the appellants had invested a sum of Rs.11,00,000/- in the business of respondent son Rakesh Soni after his marriage in 2002. The appellants had picked up a quarrel with the respondents. Owing to their quarrelsome nature, they used to abuse the respondents regularly. The appellants as also respondents' another son and daughter-in-law were residing in the house of Govind Soni, who is brother-in-law of appellant Rakesh Soni. The respondents had made a public declaration depriving them of all their movable and immovable properties on 08.09.2005 and driven them out of their house. But the appellant no. l suddenly came to the respondents on 01.09.2013 and told that since Govind Soni was now selling his house, therefore they should permit him to stay in one part of their house for one or two months and thereafter he would shift to his own personal house in Transport Nagar, which was under construction. The respondents, considering their hardship, permitted the appellants to stay in their house and provided them one room and one kitchen with lat-bath on the first floor of the house. However, there was a sudden change in their behaviour law and they started quarreling with the respondents. The appellant no. 2 threatened to drag them in criminal case for demand of dowry and other allegations. It was alleged that appellant no. l Rakesh Soni has monthly income of Rs.40,000/- from the business of jewellery. The appellants as also respondents' another son and daughter-in-law subjected to torture the respondents (parents) physically, mentally and even socially. Some times they use to beat the respondents (parents). Prayer was therefore made to direct the appellants as also respondents' another son and daughter-in-law not to misbehave and abuse the respondents and not to subject them to beating and any mental or physical cruelty. Further prayer was made that all the four be directed to provide the respondents (parents) a sum of Rs. 20,000/- per month as maintenance for their clothing, food, electricity, water charges and other day-to-day expenses. They be further directed to vacate the unauthorizedly occupied portion of the house of the respondents.

5. The appellants contested the aforesaid application by filing reply thereto, in which they denied the allegations. The Presiding Officer of the Tribunal made an effort to get the dispute amicably settled between the parties. He even appointed local Commissioner to inspe