O R D E R

% 02.08.2024

1. The Petitioner is a senior citizen having three daughters and two sons. After the marriage of children, he has been residing with his sons at Petitioner’s property bearing No. 25/120, Trilok Puri, Delhi-110091.1 He seeks eviction of his younger son, Respondent No. 1 and daughter in law, Respondent No. 2, under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007,2 citing harassment and ill-treatment. The subject property comprises of four floors. The family of Petitioner’s elder son, Mr. Shivkaran, occupies the second and third floor, while the Respondents inhabit the ground and first floors along with their children.

1“subjectproperty”

2“SeniorCitizensAct.”

W.P.(C)4465/2024 Page1of7

2. The Petitioner filed an application for eviction of the Respondents before the District Magistrate (East), alleging that he had been mistreated and subjected to verbal and physical harassment by Respondents. In the complaint, Petitioner highlighted that Respondents were coercing him to dispossess his daughter, Ms. Gunjan, who resides in Petitioner’s ancestral property located in Pratapgarh, Uttar Pradesh, and also to transfer the subject property in their name. He also narrated an incident where their quarrel manifested into physical assault on Petitioner by the Respondents. Through order dated 18th April, 2023, the District Magistrate allowed the Petitioner’s request, directing the Respondents to vacate the subject property. District Magistrate determined that Petitioner held the ownership rights to subject property on the basis of an allotment slip dated 18th January, 1977 issued by Delhi Development Authority under the Jhuggi Jhopri Removal Scheme. Considering the complaints lodged with the police3 and issuance of notice disowning the Respondents in a daily publication by Petitioner,4 the allegations of ill-treatment also found favour with the District Magistrate.

3. The afore-noted order was reversed on 03rd July, 2023 by the Divisional Commissioner in an appeal filed by Respondents. The relevant portions of Divisional Commissioner’s order are as follows:

“4. Respondent on the other hand argued that he is a senior citizen and having 3 daughters and 2 sons. He got all his children married and settled. He retired from the in the year 2006. It is submitted by the respondent that the propertyinquestionis purchasedandbuilt byhim and his elder son Sh. Shiv kumar. Respondent alleged that he is being ill- treated by the appellants. Appellants threatened him of dire consequences if the property in question is not transferred in their name. It is further alleged by the respondent that his daughter along with her minor children started residing in the ancestral house in village Bibipura, PO Jethwara, 3On09thMay,2022,29thMay,2022and03rdJuly,2022.

4Dated13thJanuary,2022.

W.P.(C)4465/2024 Page2of7 Pratapgarh, Uttar Pradesh as her in-laws have thrown her and her minor children out of the house. But the appellants fight and pressurize the respondent not to allow the daughter to reside in an ancestral house. When the respondent refused to do so they physically assaulted the respondent. The appellants used to abuse respondent on daily basis and threatenedhimtoimplicateinfalsecriminal cases.

5. The arguments and case records, including DM’s case records have been carefully considered. Rule 22 (3)(1) of Delhi Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, as amended from time to time, provides that “A Senior citizen /Parents may make an application before the Dy. Commissioner/District Magistrate of his district for eviction of his son and daughter or legal heir from his property of any kind, whether movable or immovable, ancestral or self -acquired, tangible or intangible and include right or interests in such property on account of his non-maintenanceand ill-treatment.”

6. From the perusal of the record and submissions of the parties, this appellate authority finds it to be case of property dispute. The respondent