Upholding the decision of the Maintenance Tribunal the Delhi High Court (W.P.(C) 866/2016 and CM Nos. 23434/2017, 17173/2017 SHADAB KHAIRI AND ANR Vs THE STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) AND ORS) recently held that a son should be evicted from his father’s house if he denied to pay maintenance as agreed by him
In the present case one
Mohammud Aftab Khairi (68 years, a senior citizen), father of the petitioners (
Respondent) is the owner and resident of the properties bearing Nos.3616-3617,
Katra Deena Beg, Lal Kuan, Delhi-110006. The said properties are contiguous. He
has three sons namely, Shahab Khairi, Shadab Khairi (petitioner no.1) and
Shahnawaz Khairi (petitioner no.2). He and his family occupy the first floor of
the properties. The second and third floor is occupied by his three sons.
Respondent no.3(father) filed a complaint before the Maintenance Tribunal, inter alia, alleging that he had spent a considerable amount on renovating the residential premises and had provided separate residential accommodation to his three sons on the second and the third floors. He claimed that his sons had agreed to pay a monthly sum of ₹15,000/- for his maintenance and additional ₹5,000/- per month to his wife (their mother) for day-to-day requirements. Respondent No.3 complained that despite a verbal agreement, his three sons (who were arrayed as respondents before the Maintenance Tribunal) had failed to live up to their commitment; they had paid the agreed amount to their mother for the month of March 2012 but had, thereafter, failed to provide any further assistance.
The petitioners (respondents therein) had filed a statement contesting the complaint before Tribunal and had, inter alia, alleged that the properties in question were ancestral properties and therefore they had the right to reside in it as co-owners.
The Maintenance Tribunal examined the complaint and passed the impugned order directing as under:
2. Respondent No. l shall look after and provide all the medical care to the complainant‟s wife or any other member of the family, in time of need.
3. Respondent No. l shall also pay a sum of Rs.5000/- per month to the complainant.
4. Respondent No.2&3 shall peacefully vacate the respective portions on third floor of the property bearing No.3617 Katra Deena Beg, Lal Kuan, Delhi, occupied by them within 3 weeks from the date of receiving of this order and make their own arrangements to shift within specified time.
6. That SHO PS Hauz Qazi is directed to depute beat staff for regular visits to ensure that life and property of the senior citizen parent is safe and secure. The SHO is further directed to ensure implementation of the above said direction in true letter and spirit and put the complainant in possession of the property. Necessary compliance report be sent to the tribunal.”
Then the petitioners (sons) filed the present appeal before the Delhi High Court contending that the order passed by the Maintenance Tribunal directing that the petitioners be evicted from the property in question is without jurisdiction.
The Court observed that
" The aforesaid contention is unmerited. This issue is squarely covered by a decision of this Court in Sunny Paul & Anr. v. State NCT of Delhi & Ors.:(W.P. (C) No.10463/2015) 2017 SCC Online Del 7451, wherein this Court had concluded as under:
“73. Keeping in view the aforesaid conclusions, this Court is of the view that the Act, 2007, amongst other remedies, provides for eviction of adult children in cases of parental abuse–like in the present case. Accordingly, the present writ petition and application are dismissed and the concerned SDM and SHO, Police Station Civil Lines, are directed to forthwith comply with the impugned order dated 1st October, 2015 passed by the Maintenance Tribunal, Central District, Delhi.”
" This Court had noticed in its decision that Section 22 (2) of the Act required the State Government to provide a comprehensive action plan for protecting the life and property of senior citizens. However, as on the date when the said petition (W.P. (C) No.10463/2015) was filed, the Government of NCT of Delhi had not framed any rules providing for eviction of unauthorized
occupants and had not
prepared a comprehensive action plan as required. under Section 22 (2) of
the Act. However, thereafter, the Government of NCT has framed the Delhi
Maintenance and Welfare of Senior Citizens (Amendment) Rules 2016, which
expressly empower the Deputy Commissioner / District Magistrate to pass
eviction orders from properties belonging to Senior Citizens. "
And upholding the decision of The Maintenance Tribunal the Delhi High Court held that
" The petition is accordingly dismissed. All applications stands disposed of. "
