Nagpur High Court Upholds Eviction Order Against Lawyer-Son in Landmark Senior Citizens Case
In a significant ruling that reinforces the rights of elderly citizens, the Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court has recently upheld an order permitting a senior citizen to evict his lawyer-son from the house he owns. The court affirmed that authorities under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 are empowered to direct eviction when circumstances warrant such action.
Court Dismisses Writ Petition, Cites Shocking Allegations
Dismissing a writ petition filed by the lawyer-son, Justice Prafulla Khubalkar refused to interfere with an order passed by the Collector-cum-Appellate Tribunal. This order restrained the son from obstructing his father's peaceful residence and allowed eviction with police assistance in case of non-compliance. "A perusal of the allegations levelled by the father against the son (of using abusive language) shocks the conscience of this court, and there is no reason to disbelieve the former's contentions in the affidavit," the judge stated emphatically.
Background of the Family Dispute and Legal Proceedings
The dispute originated from a complaint filed by a 79-year-old man, who alleged persistent harassment and cruel treatment by his son. The son was residing with his family in the father's house located in Dabha, Nagpur. Initially, the sub-divisional officer, acting as the Maintenance Tribunal, rejected the eviction plea in June 2023, suggesting the father approach a civil court for family disputes. However, this decision was overturned on appeal by the collector on March 26, 2025.
Son's Arguments and Court's Rejection
The lawyer-son argued before the High Court that the 2007 Act only provides for maintenance and does not confer powers to order eviction. He also contended that his father, being a retired person drawing a monthly pension of Rs50,000, had no occasion to invoke the statute. Opposing this petition, the senior citizen relied on an affidavit detailing alleged acts of harassment by the son. The court noted that these allegations went unrebutted, as the petitioner neither filed a rejoinder nor sought time to dispute them.
Legal Precedents and Powers Under the Act
"The position of law is that the authorities under the Act of 2007 are empowered to pass orders of eviction of sons/daughters/daughters-in-law from the house property owned by the senior citizen, and they cannot compel the senior citizens to allow them to reside in the property against the desire of the senior citizens," the court said. This statement was made while referring to earlier rulings of the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court, which have consistently upheld the protective intent of the legislation.
Key Takeaways from the Judgment
- Affirmed senior citizens' right to live peacefully in property owned by them.
- Authorities under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act can order eviction.
- Eviction can be enforced with police assistance if necessary.
- Rejected the argument that the Act is limited only to maintenance.
- Harassment and cruel treatment by children can justify eviction.
- Unrebutted affidavits carry significant evidentiary value.
- Senior citizens cannot be compelled to allow residence against their will.
- Pension or financial independence does not bar relief under the Act.
- The object of the law is the protection and dignity of senior citizens.
- The Appellate Tribunal's powers were upheld as lawful and necessary.
Finding that the appellate authority acted in keeping with the object of protecting senior citizens, the court emphasized there was an "imminent necessity" to implement the eviction order, even with police aid if required. This ruling sets a strong precedent for similar cases across India, highlighting the judiciary's commitment to safeguarding the welfare of elderly citizens against familial abuse and ensuring their dignity in their own homes.
