JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Sri Amol Kumar, Advocate assisted by Sri Shivanshu Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Vidyabhushan Pandey, learned counsel for the opposite party, Sri S.P.Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State.

2. By means of the instant writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the impugned order dated 22-11-2019 passed by the learned District Magistrate, Sultanpur, vide appeal No. 1333 of 2019 and Computer Case No. D 2019046800133, titled as ‘Kallumal and another Vs. Krishna Kumar’, while exercising powers under section 16 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizen Act, 2007.

3. The factual matrix of the case is that on 16-07-1971, the grandfather of the petitioner namely late Ramdhani purchased a part of land of Gata No. 179 having area, 2 Biswa vide sale deed, from Ram Dulare and Shiv Dulare, both sons of Jagrup, in favour of the opposite party no. 4 and thereafter, the rest part of the same Gata admeasuring 2 Biswa was purchased by the father of the petitioner on 17-07-1971, out of the income of the Hindu Undivided Family(HUF), in favour of his younger son, who was minor at that period of time and thus, the same was purchased under the guardianship of his father. After purchase of aforesaid land, the grandfather of the petitioner constructed a house over the said land with the earning of HUF and was living in the same house. In between, the younger brother of opposite party no. 4 expired and thus, the property owned by late Om Prakash was divulged to opposite party no. 4 and the children of opposite party no. 4, in equal shares. The private opposite parties have three sons and two daughters namely Rajendra Prasad, Krishna Kumar, Janardan, Sushila and Anjali. The widow of Rajendra Prasad re-married after the death of Rajendra Prasad and is living with her husband,whereas the minor son born out of the wedlock of Rajendra Prasad and Savita Devi is residing with the petitioner.

4. On 16-08-2018, the petitioner married with Rajpati in a Arya Samaj Mandir who belongs to Scheduled Caste Community and thus the father of the petitioner was annoyed and never accepted the marriage aforesaid. Due to annoyance, an F.I.R. was lodged against the petitioner so as to dissolve the marriage, whereafter, the petitioner filed a case namely Writ Petition no. 25345 (M/B) of 2018, (Smt. Rajapati and another Vs. State of U.P. and Others),wherein, an interim relief was granted in their favour, though later on, the same was disposed of.

5. The private-opposite parties filed an application before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Sultanpur under section 125 of Cr.P.C., for grant of maintenance against the petitioner and his brother and the interim maintenance was fixed @ Rs. 8,000/-p.m. and half of the amount was to be given by the present petitioner.

6. In the house in question, there was a shop which was let out by the father of the petitioner to Sadab & Izhar, on a monthly rent of Rs. 26,500/-, but, the same was concealed while instituting an application under section 125 of Cr.P.C. Thereafter, the private opposite parties have also filed an application for maintenance under section 7(1) of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act 2007 (hereinafter referred as Act 2007),wherein the Sub. Divisional Magistrate passed an order in favour of the private opposite parties though, the same was not challenged by the petitioner and the petitioner is paying the amount of maintenance to his parents on each and every month.

7. Thereafter, an appeal has been filed before the District Magistrate on 14-12-2017, whereby the petitioner has been directed to evict the house. The private opposite parties vide sale deed dated 14-12-2017, sold out a part of the property of Gata No. 179 and being aggrieved, the petitioner filed a civil suit to declare him to be co-sharer of 1/6 share in the land in question, which is registered as Regular Suit No. 140 of 2019, (Krishna Kumar and Another Vs