The eviction of two people from the home of their deceased father was recently confirmed by the Bombay High Court on the grounds that the elderly stepmother needed comfort and serenity as her days drew to a close.
The Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Older People Act of 2007’s section 7 tribunal’s judgement compelling the petitioners to leave the property was affirmed by Judge RG Avachat in the case of Mayur Vaijanath Tawde & Anr. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors ( Criminal Writ Petition No. 4970 of 2019 )
FACTS OF THE CASE :
The father of the petitioners passed away in 2014. According to their stepmother, they ill-treated her after the passing of their father. The petitioners stated that they were mistreated by their stepmother and sought refuge with their maternal grandma as a result. They returned to the disputed location after their grandmother passed away. The petitioners argued that because they had an inherited title to the contested property, they could not be removed.
The panel ruled that they must leave the property in question, which led to the current writ petition.
The petitioners argued that the tribunal only had the authority to award monetary maintenance. It lacks the authority to issue any further orders, including the one that is being contested.
JUDGEMENT:
The stepmother is currently residing at her sister’s home, the court said, and the contested properties are temporarily vacant. According to the court, she has the right to live in the contested property because she is over 65 and one of her husband’s Class 1 heirs.
According to the court, the 2007 Act’s goal was to make it easy, affordable, and quick for elderly parents to request maintenance.
The term “maintenance” is defined in Section 2(b) of the Act to include housing, food, clothes, and medical care. Step parents are included in the definition of parents under section 2(d).
It is true that the tribunal has the authority to award maintenance allowances up to a monthly maximum of Rs. 10,000. Applications for maintenance are discussed under Section 5 of the Act of 2007. According to the dictionary, “maintenance” implies a provision for housing, the court noted.
The petitioners and their stepmother have difficult relationships, and the court found it unlikely that they will all live peacefully together on the contested property.
The tribunal’s order requiring the petitioners to leave the disputed property and turn over their position to their stepmother was affirmed by the court as a result.
“Respondent No.3 (stepmother), being in the evening of her life, does need comfort and peace. The relations between the Petitioners and her were strained. She being the stepmother of the Petitioners, there is no likelihood of all of them residing together peacefully in a disputed premises. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the tribunal was, therefore, justified to pass the order directing the Petitioners to vacate the dispute premises and handover its possession to Respondent No.3.”, the judge stated.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal falls into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
JUDGEMENT REVIEW BY SREYA MARY.
