Point of law: Legislative intent purpose behind the enactment of the Act of 2007 while laying out the procedure to be followed by a Maintenance Tribunal under the Act of 2007.

JUDGMENT :

1. The lawyers are abstaining from the work due to strike.

2. Though the matter came up for consideration on the Civil Misc. IV Stay Application (No.3772/2023), however, with the consent of the parties present in person before this Court, the writ petition itself was heard and the same is being decided finally.

3. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:

“Therefore; in light of facts stated, issues raised and arguments advanced; it is most humbly prayed that

a) This writ petition may be accepted.

b) The order dated 17.02.2021 (Annex.1) passed by the court of Maintenance Tribunal and Sub-divisional officer Jodhpur with maintenance case no.94/2018 titled as ‘Achlaram Bhargava Joshi Vs. Ashok Kumar Joshi & Anr.” may be quashed and set aside. c) The order dated 17.03.2021 (Annex.2) passed in the matter of Recalling Application no.22/2021 titled as ‘Achlaram Bhargava Joshi Vs. Ashok Kumar Joshi & Anr.’, may be quashed and set aside. d) Order as to cost may be passed in favor of the present petitioner.

Any other order which this court deems fit in the ends of justice may be passed in favor of present petitioner.”

4. As the pleaded facts would reveal, the present petitioner is the eldest son of the respondent no.1; who has two more sons, Mr. Rajendra Kumar Bhargava and Suresh Kumar Bhargava. The respondent no. 1 retired from the post of J.T.O. from the department of B.S.N.L. in the year 2008 and since then he is receiving regular pension.

4.1 Until the year 2013, the petitioner and his family were residing together with the respondent no. 1, in the house bearing Plot No. 153, Masooriya, Balaji Road, Jodhpur and that on account of some dispute with respondent no. 1, the petitioner along with his family started living in a different portion of the said house, which is the ancestral property of the family.

4.2 A suit was filed by the petitioner for partition and permanent injunction before the learned District Judge, Jodhpur Metropolitan, and an interim order (at Annex.-3), dated 30.07.2018, directing the parties to maintain status quo regarding the property in question, was passed.

4.3 Subsequently, the respondent no. 1 filed an application under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (for short “Act of 2007”), before the learned Maintenance Tribunal and Sub Divisional Officer, Jodhpur, principally averring therein, that the petitioner is having illegal possession over the property in question and that the petitioner is neglecting to maintain the father (respondent no.1).

4.4 The learned Tribunal vide the impugned order dated 17.02.2021, allowed the aforementioned application while directing the present petitioner to pay an amount of Rs. 10,000/-per month towards maintenance to the respondent no.1.

4.5 Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred an application for recalling the said order before the learned Tribunal, but the same was dismissed vide order dated 17.03.2021.

4.6 The present petition has been preferred against the aforementioned two impugned orders dated 17.02.2021 and 17.03.2021.

5. The petitioner (present in person) submitted that the respondent no.1 is getting a pension of approximately Rs. 33,000/-per month and in addition to that, he is getting an income of approximately Rs. 25000/-per month from his two rental properties, located in Jodhpur.

5.1 He further submitted that the other two sons (brothers of the petitioner) are equally liable to maintain the respondent no. 1, and that the petitioner’s brother, namely Rajendra Kumar Bhargava, is conducting a successful transport business under the name of ‘Charu Packers and Movers’, while the petitioner is a heart patient, who has undergone heart surgery in the year 2016, and owing to his ill health is unable to conduct his business or undertake any other work. And that, at present the business of the petitioner is being taken care of by his son, Lokendra Kumar Bhargava