IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Vikas Bahl, J.
Sarita Sareen – Appellant
Versus
District Magistrate Kapurthala & Anr. – Respondents
CWP No. 14224 of 2022
Decided On : 03-11-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition filed under article 226/227. (Para 1) |
| 2. authority of tribunal under senior citizens act for eviction. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. arguments regarding merits of dismissal. (Para 4 , 6) |
| 4. court upheld authority to order eviction. (Para 5) |
| 5. court's review of authority and previous judgments. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 6. order for re-evaluation of eviction case. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
Judgment
Mr. Vikas Bahl, J. (Oral):- This writ petition has been filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 03.11.2020 (Annexure P-6) passed by respondent No.1 whereby petition filed by the petitioner under Section 23 of the Maintenance and Parents and Senior Citizen Act, 2007 read with Rules (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act of 2007’) for ejectment of respondent No.2 from the shop in dispute has been dismissed.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petition filed by the senior citizen has been dismissed solely on the ground that a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had struck down the power of eviction. It is submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case titled as “Smt. S Vanitha Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Bengaluru Urban District & Ors., reported as 2021(15) SCC 730, had observed that a Tribunal constituted under the Senior Citizens Act, 2007 has the authority to pass an order of eviction, if it is necessary and expedient to ensure the maintenance and protection of the senior citizen or parent and that, the eviction in other words would be an incidence of the enforcement of the right to maintenance and protection. Relevant part of para No.25 of the said judgment is reproduced herein below: -
“xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx
25. The substance of sub-section (2) of Section 23 , as submitted by the Second and Third respondents, is that the Tribunal had the jurisdiction to pass an order directing the eviction of the appellant who is their daughter-in-law. According to the submission, the power to order eviction is implicit in the provision guaranteeing a “right to receive maintenance out of an estate. and the enforcement of that right. In supporting the submission, they have referred to the view which has been taken by several High Courts, indicating that the Tribunal may order the eviction of a child or a relative from the property of a senior citizen, where there has been a breach of the obligation to maintain the senior citizen. The Tribunal under the Senior Citizens Act 2007 may have the authority to order an eviction, if it is necessary and expedient to ensure the maintenance and protection of the senior citizen or parent. Eviction, in other words would be an incident of the enforcement of the right to maintenance and protection.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that this Court in CWP-15170-2023 titled as “Ravi Kumar Vs. Deputy Commissioner-cum-Appellate Tribunal, Jhajjar and others, decided on 20.07.2023, after taking into consideration the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Smt. S. Vatnitha’s case (supra) had upheld an order of eviction passed therein by the authorities under Act of 2007. The relevant portion of the said judgment is as under: -
“9. In the said judgment, the Hon’ble Supreme Court had taken into consideration the legislative scheme of the 2007 Act & reference was also made to Chapter V of the 2007 Act which provide for “protection of life and property of senior citizens”. The objects of the Act which included a need to give more attention to the care & protection of older persons was also taken into consideration. It was observed that the procedure to be followed by the Tribunal was of a summary nature. The contesting claim for both the parties to the effect as to whether the authorities under the Act have the jurisdiction to entertain the proceedings for eviction was also noticed. Relevant part of Paragraph No.6; Paragraphs 15, 16, 17 in their entirety as well as relevant portion of Par
Smt. S Vanitha Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Bengaluru Urban District & Ors.
The implicit power of the Tribunal to order eviction for the maintenance and protection of senior citizens or parents under the Act of 2007.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the authority of the Tribunal under the 2007 Act to pass an order of eviction to ensure the maintenance and protection of senior citizens, as empha....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the authority of the Tribunal under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 to order eviction if necessary and expe....
The Maintenance Tribunal can decide eviction applications under Section 23 of the 2007 Act, independent of prior orders under Section 22.
Tribunal under Senior Citizens Act may order child's eviction from parent's property sans monetary maintenance claim if essential for senior citizen's residence and normal life, particularly after fo....
The Senior Citizens Act, 2007 and the Delhi Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2009 provide protection to senior citizens from ill-treatment and non-maintenance by their ch....
Tribunals under Senior Citizens Act can order children's eviction from parent's property without monetary maintenance claim, as 'maintenance' includes residence essential for normal life, per purposi....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.