Back
2025 Supreme(Mad) 2606
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, K.RAJASEKAR, JJ.
K.Gopinathan - Appellant
Vs.
District Collector, Chennai Cum Appellate Authority - Respondent
W.A.No.2967 of 2024 and C.M.P.No.22208 of 2024
Decided On : 01-04-2025
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mrs.Chitra Sampath Senior Counsel For Mr.T.S.Baskaran
For the Respondent: Mr.Vadivelu Deenadayalan Additional Government Pleader, Mr.C.Vidhusan
The Senior Citizens Act protects the right to residence and dignity of senior citizens, emphasizing that financial support alone is insufficient for a dignified life.
Headnote:
(A) Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 - Section 4 and Section 23 - Right to residence of senior citizens - The appellant, son of the senior citizen, was found to have harassed her and unlawfully occupied her matrimonial home, leading to a writ petition by the senior citizen for her right to reside peacefully in her property. The Writ Court confirmed the District Collector's order allowing the senior citizen to reside in her house, emphasizing the need for dignity and security for senior citizens. (Paras 11, 35, 36)
(B) Right to Dignity - The court highlighted that the right to residence encompasses not just financial support but also the dignity and basic amenities necessary for a decent life, as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution. (Paras 22, 24)
Facts of the case:
The senior citizen was subjected to harassment by her son, who unlawfully occupied her matrimonial home after the death of her husband. She filed complaints regarding physical and mental abuse, leading to a writ petition for her right to reside in her own home. (Paras 2-10)
Findings of Court:
The court found that the senior citizen has a right to reside in her matrimonial home and that her dignity must be protected under the Senior Citizens Act. The appellant's actions were deemed unlawful. (Paras 35, 36)
Issues: The main issues included the senior citizen's right to reside in her matrimonial home and the legality of the appellant's actions in occupying the property. (Paras 30, 34)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the Senior Citizens Act aims to protect the dignity and rights of senior citizens, affirming that mere financial maintenance is insufficient without ensuring a dignified living environment. (Paras 20, 22)
Result: Writ appeal dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
Dissatisfied with the writ order dated 22.08.2024 passed in W.P.No.6647 of 2024, the present Intra-Court Appeal has been instituted under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent. The 4th respondent in the writ petition is the appellant before this Court.
2. The 4th respondent, Mrs.Malarkodi, a senior citizen, filed a complaint before the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO), Central Chennai on 18.07.2023 stating that she has three children - two daughters and one son, and her husband died on 04.02.2019.
3. The senior citizen and her husband resided in their own house and the said property stands in the name of Mrs.K.Malarkodi/senior citizen. The appellant, Mr.K.Gopinathan, the son of the senior citizen, divorced his wife and started living with the senior citizen. After nine years, the appellant married his divorced wife, Mrs.Sindhuja and lived separately in MMDA colony.
4. The Karur property of the family was sold for Rs.5 Crores and the appellant insisted that the entire amount should be paid to him. He harassed the senior citizen, locked her in the house and physically assaulted her. The senior citizen stated in her complaint that she was ill-treated and harassed both physically and mentally.
5. Further, the appellant starting causing trouble to the senior citizen's daughters and their husbands. The senior citizen was driven out of her Anna Nagar house, where she had lived with her husband for several years, and the appellant occupied the entire house with his family. The senior citizen has stated that she is living with her elder daughter. The car, which stood in the name of the deceased husband of the senior citizen, was also sold by the appellant without the knowledge of the senior citizen. She filed a police complaint at the Anna Nagar Police Station in C.S.R.No.461 of 2023 and no action has been taken. Thus, the complaint was filed before the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO).
6. The appellant has given a statement before the Revenue Divisional Officer stating that the property in Karur, which belonged to his father, was sold for Rs.15 Crores. However, the senior citizen only accounted for Rs.5 Crore, and the remaining Rs.10 Crores were allegedly paid to the daughters. In Aminijikarai, the father of the appellant owns 30 houses, generating a rent of Rs.6 Lakhs, which is entirely received by the senior citizen and her two daughters. The appellant states that he resides in the Anna Nagar house and has a share in the other properties. The mother of the appellant is acting under the ill advise of her daughters. Further, the appellant expressed his consent to maintain the senior citizen.
7. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Central Chennai passed final orders on 04.11.2023 stating that the senior citizen receives substantial rent from the properties, as per the statement of the appellant. Therefore, the grant of maintenance under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 [herein after referred to as 'Senior Citizens Act] would not arise at all. However, the orders state that, under Section 23 of the Senior Citizens Act, the appellant must provide all medical expenditures and amenities, along with his sisters.
8. Dissatisfied with the order of the RDO, the senior citizen preferred an appeal before the District Collector, Chennai. The District Collector conducted an independent inquiry and while confirming the orders of the Revenue Divisional Officer, issued a direction stating that the senior citizen should be allowed to reside in her house, at Anna Nagar, where she has lived for several years along with her late husband, since it is her matrimonial home.
9. The senior citizen filed W.P.No.6647 of 2024, challenging the order passed by the District Collector. The Writ Court elaborately considered the spirit of the provisions of the Senior Citizens Act with reference to the facts established between the parties.
10. The facts revealed that the senior citizen was driven out of her matrimonial hou
