SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(P&H) 2101

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Rakesh Kumar Jain, J.
Harvinder Kaur Bawa – Petitioner
Versus
The Appellate Tribunal, Panchkula and Others – Respondents
CWP No. 17482 of 2015
Decided On : 17-10-2016

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Kabir Sarin, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Ms. Gaganpreet Kaur, AAG, Haryana, Mr. Sudhir Mittal, Advocate.

The main legal point established in the judgment is that an application under Section 23(1) of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act can only be filed to avoid a property transfer and must follow specific conditions and procedures.

Headnote:

Maintenance of Parents and Senior Citizens Act - Application under Section 23(1) - Sections 2(b), (d), (h), (k), 7, 15, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 32 - The court discussed the definitions of 'maintenance', 'parent', 'senior citizens', and 'welfare' as well as the constitution of Maintenance Tribunal and Appellate Tribunal. It highlighted the procedure for eviction from property belonging to senior citizens/parents and the conditions for declaring a property transfer void under Section 23(1) of the Act.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a widowed senior citizen, filed an application under Section 23(1) of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, seeking eviction of her son and daughter-in-law from a portion of a house. The application was dismissed on the ground that the property was not transferred to the private respondents.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the application filed by the petitioner under Section 23(1) of the Act was rightly dismissed as she was required to file an application under Section 22(2) of the Act or follow the action plan's procedure for eviction, rather than seeking eviction through the Tribunal.

Issues: The main issue was whether the application filed by the petitioner under Section 23(1) of the Act for seeking eviction of the private respondents was maintainable.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the application under Section 23(1) of the Act can only be filed to avoid a document by which the title of the property has been transferred, without filing a suit for declaration in the Civil Court. It emphasized the conditions to be proved by the senior citizen/parent and the summary procedure to be followed by the Tribunal.

Final Decision: The present petition was dismissed for being denuded of any merit.

JUDGMENT :

Rakesh Kumar Jain, J.

1. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 24.11.2014 passed by the Welfare Tribunal, Panchkula, dismissing her application filed under Section 23(1) of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) and order dated 24.03.2015 passed by the Appellate Tribunal-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Panchkula, dismissing her appeal.

2. In brief, the petitioner is a widowed senior citizen. She filed an application under Section 23(1) of the Act against her son and daughter-in-law seeking their eviction from the portion, in their occupation, of House No.225, Sector-6, Panchkula. Her application filed under Section 23(1) has been dismissed, inter-alia, on the ground that it was not found maintainable because the petitioner has not transferred the property in question in the name of the private respondents.

3. Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner can maintain the application under Section 23(1) of the Act and has basically relied upon the word “or otherwise”, used in that provision, to contend that the petitioner can seek eviction for recovering possession and has relied upon a decision of this Court rendered in the case of Promil Tomar and others vs. State of Haryana and others, 2014 (1) RCR (Civil) 403.

4. On the other hand, counsel for the respondents has submitted that the very title of the property in question is in litigation as the said property was allotted by the Haryana Urban Development Authority to respondent No.3 and has been illegally mutated in the name of the petitioner during the period when he was a minor.

5. The point involved in this case is in a narrow compass as this Court has to decide as to whether the application filed by the petitioner under Section 23(1) of the Act for seeking eviction of the private respondents is maintainable?

6. In order to appreciate the rival contentions, it would be necessary to discuss various provisions of the Act. The name of the Act itself suggests that it has been enacted for maintenance and welfare of the parents and senior citizens. The words “maintenance” “parent”, “senior citizens” and “welfare” have been specifically defined under Sections 2(b), (d), (h) and (k) respectively in the Act. All the four definitions are reproduced as under:-

“(b) “maintenance” includes provision for food, clothing, residence and medical attendance and treatment;

xxx xxx xxx xxx

(d) “parent” means father or mother whether biological, adoptive or step father or step mother, as the case may be, whether or not the father or the mother is a senior citizen;

xxx xxx xxx xxx

(h) “senior citizens” means any person being a citizen of India, who has attained the age of sixty years or above;

xxx xxx xxx xxx

(k) “welfare” means provision for food, health care, recreation centres and other amenities necessary for the senior citizens.”

7. It is pertinent to mention that as per definition of “parent” he or she need not to be a senior citizen, meaning thereby he or she need not to be a person of more than 60 years of age. “Maintenance” includes provision for food, clothing, residence, medical attendance and treatment but “welfare” means provision for food, healthcare, recreation centres and other amenities necessary for the senior citizens. The Legislature has dedicated Chapter II for the maintenance of parents and senior citizens. Section 7 of the Act provides for constitution of the Maintenance Tribunal and Section 15 of the Act for the Appellate Tribunal. A complete procedure is provided from Sections 4 to 18 of the Act in respect of maintenance, whereas Sections 19 and 20 deals with the welfare part of the parent and senior citizens, which mandates establishment of old age homes and medical support. Section 21 of the Act deals with the measures for publicity, awareness etc. for welfare of senior citizens and Secti


































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top