IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 16-12-2025 CORAM THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA and WMP Nos.14248 & 14249 of 2024 Vinayagam ..Petitioner(s)

Vs

1. Presiding Officer Cum-The Appellate Tribunal I, Under The Maintenance And Welfare Of Parents And Senior Citizens Act 2007 Puducherry District Collectorate, Puducherry.

2. The Presiding Officer Tribunal I Cum, Sub Divisional Magistrate (north), Tribunal For The Maintenance And Welfare Of Parents And Senior Citizen (north) Puducherry

3. The Tahsildar Taluk Office, Puducherry

4. M.Pounammal W/o. Late. Muthukrishnan, 201 Kamaraj Salai, Pillaithottam Puducherry 605

013 ..Respondent(s)

Prayer: The writ petition is filed under Section 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the 2nd respondent in MWPSC No. 19 of 2023 dated 21.09.2023 and the order of the 2nd respondent in review Proceedings No. 915/ TMWPSC/ Review/ 2024/ 701 dated 28.03.2024 quash the same and consequently restore the peaceful possession of the petitioner’s property in House located at no. 201 Kamaraj Salai, Pillaithottam, Puducherry 605 013 without following the due process of law.

For Petitioner(s): Mr.C.Vigneswaran For Respondent(s): Mr.Sreedhar, AGP(P) for R1 to R3 Ms. V. Srimathi for R4

ORDER

The above Writ Petition has been filed for the following reliefs:-

" calling for the records of the 2nd respondent in MWPSC No. 19 of 2023 dated 21.09.2023 and the order of the 2nd respondent in review Proceedings No. 915/ TMWPSC/ Review/ 2024/ 701 dated 28.03.2024 quash the same and consequently restore the peaceful possession of the petitioners property in House located at no. 201 Kamaraj Salai, Pillaithottam, Puducherry 605 013 without following the due process of law.”

2. Briefs facts:-

2.1. The 4th respondent, who is the mother of the petitioner, filed an application complaint under Section 5 and 23(1) of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens (MWPSC) Act, 2007 before the 2nd respondent herein stating that the petitioner was employed as a Supervisor in Auro Food Company, a job which she had secured for him. She would further submit that the petitioner is living separately in a portion of her house with his wife and has not been extending any assistance to her or her husband. That apart, she would submit that out of his own income, the petitioner had purchased two vacant sites and had also constructed a two-storey residential house. Despite this, the petitioner continues to occupy her house, and hence she prayed that he be vacated from the said property.

2.2. The petitioner herein filed a detailed counter affidavit in which he contended that the subject property was purchased by his father in the name of his mother and that he had contributed to the construction of the property. He would further submit that his mother continues to occupy the ground floor of the subject property and earns a monthly rental income of Rs.50,000/- by letting out two shops in the subject property. That apart, she is also receiving rental income from other properties. He would further submit that his mother has adequate income and also has a roof over her head. He would also submit that he has been in possession and enjoyment of a portion of the subject property for a long time. Therefore, the eviction application filed by the 4^th respondent herein is not maintainable.

2.3. The 2^nd respondent after hearing both parties had passed an order dated 21.09.2023 directing the petitioner to vacate the premises and hand over possession to the 4^th respondent. The said order was challenged by the petitioner by filing an appeal before the 1^st respondent who by an order dated 16.02.2024 rejected the appeal as not maintainable and directed the petitioner to approach competent legal forum. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner had filed a review petition before the 2^nd respondent, who had again rejected the review petition only on the ground that the appeal was rejecte