The Bombay High Court has ruled that the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 is meant to protect vulnerable parents but cannot be weaponised to evict children in a summary manner without a maintenance claim. The court set aside an eviction order passed against a 53-year-old man who was directed to vacate a bungalow owned by his 75-year-old father.
A division bench of Justices R I Chagla and Farhan Dubash quashed the tribunal’s October order that required the son to hand over possession of the property, observing that the Act is a “beneficial statute intended to safeguard the vulnerable (senior citizen), but it cannot be (mis)used by the senior citizen as a tool for summary eviction.”
The father, a retired IAS officer, had approached the tribunal alleging mental pressure after permitting his son to live in the premises out of love and affection. However, the High Court noted that he had not claimed maintenance nor levelled allegations of harassment or torture.
The court emphasised that the senior citizen was financially secure, owned multiple residential and commercial properties, and lived separately with his wife. Meanwhile, the son had been occupying the bungalow and running his business from it, as permitted under a 2013 agreement that allowed him to reside and conduct commercial activity “for as long as he wants” without paying any charges.
The bench also recorded that the son bore expenses for maintenance, electricity, water, and property tax. It described the eviction plea as a “counter blast” to the son’s partition suit pending between the parties.
Finding that the Act could not be invoked to reclaim possession under such circumstances, especially in absence of any maintenance claim, the court concluded that eviction from the only premises the son had would leave him without a roof over his head.
With this ruling, the High Court reaffirmed that while the law serves as a protective measure for senior citizens, it cannot be stretched to bypass civil remedies or to settle unrelated family disputes through summary proceedings.
