Mumbai: For a senior citizen to claim relief under the law meant for the welfare of the elderly, it is essential for him to make out a case of inability to maintain himself out of his earnings and earnings from his property, the Bombay high court recently held. The HC set aside a tribunal’s February 2024 order that had directed two sons to vacate a house where they resided, after the father, residing elsewhere, wanted them out, citing provisions of the socio-beneficial legislation. “Every case of conflict between a senior citizen and his offspring would not be covered by the remedial jurisdiction of the act,” said Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan, saying it was necessary to demonstrate the inability to maintain oneself and for tribunals to have a holistic reading of three provisions of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.The HC, however, said it did not comment on case merits and gave the father liberty to apply afresh before the tribunal with empirical evidence to demonstrate his case and the sons, entitled to their response and evidence of whether the act’s jurisdiction is available to him.“The objective of directing a relative to vacate the premises to enable maintaining the emotional needs and peace expected in normal life would presuppose the family living under one roof, with the need to remove the relative to enable the senior citizen’s peace,” Justice Sundaresan said, adding, “A situation where the parties have been in conflict for long and one desires the other to be removed from a property where they do not reside jointly… is not a matter that would fall within the ambit and scope of remedial intervention under the Act.”The sons, from their father’s late first wife, reside in a Malad slum unit. The retired pension-drawing father had remarried and resided elsewhere but claimed the sons were drawing rent, not residing in Malad. The maintenance tribunal held father disentitled to maintenance. The act entitles a senior citizen to maintain himself from property earnings, was the father’s case. The HC held Section 4 entitles a senior citizen to claim protection on inability to maintain oneself from earnings and property and obliges adult children to maintain parents. Both elements don’t operate in a vaccum, HC said.
