Bombay High Court: Noting the misery of parents aged 90 years, G.S. Kulkarni, J., observed that,
“Daughters are daughters forever and sons are sons till they are married” albeit there would surely be exemplary exceptions.
A Sad Case
In the present matter, petitioner 1 alongwith his wife petitioner 2 and their daughter petitioner 3 dragged his parents-respondents 1 and 2, aged 90 and 89 years in protracted legal proceedings.
As a last resort, the parents had to invoke the provisions of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 on which the Maintenance Tribunal granted relief to the parents.
Aggrieved with the decision of the Maintenance Tribunal the present petition was filed.
Misery of Parents
At such an advanced stage of lives, parents had to reach the tribunal as petitioners 1 and 2 were forcibly trying to grab the flat in which the parents were residing and had permitted the petitioners to reside who were harassing and torturing the parents since many years.
Flat in Question
The flat initially belonged to the father and later gifted it to his two daughters by gift deed.
Metropolitan Magistrate had prohibited petitioner 1 and 2 from committing any act of domestic violence and had restrained them from dispossessing or in any manner disturbing the possession of the mother from the shared household.
The above order was passed on the complaint of the mother.
Analysis
High Court noted that the present case was a ‘classic case’ where the petitioners 1 and 2 intended to prevent the parents from leading a normal life at their old age of about 90 years.
Defeating Parents right to lead a normal life
It was stated that the property in question was not an ancestral property on which the petitioner 1 could claim any legal right so as to keep himself on such property alongwith his family and foist themselves on the parents against their wishes by remaining on the property without any legal rights.
Hence, Maintenance Tribunal had rightly recognized the rights of the parents on the property.
Concluding the matter, Court noted that the present case was a story of desperate parents who intend to be at peace at such advanced stage in life. Whether such bare minimum expectations and requirement should also be deprived to them by an affluent son, is a thought which the petitioners need to ponder on.
Adding to the above, Bench stated that the son seemed to be blinded in discharging his obligations to cater to his old and needy parents and on the contrary dragged them to litigation.
It is painful to conceive that whatever are the relations between the son and the parents, should the son disown his old aged parents for material gains?
While directing the petitioners to vacate the flat in question alongwith his family members, the petition was rejected. [Ashish Vinod Dalal v. Vinod Ramanlal Dalal, 2021 SCC OnLine Bom 2976, decided on 15-09-2021]
Advocates before the Court:
Mr Yashpal Thakur with Mr Surendra Raja with Mr Mukund Pandya, for the Petitioner.
Mr Abhay Khandeparkar, Senior Advocate i/b. Mr Kunal Tiwari, for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Ms Vaishali Nimbalkar, AGP for the State.
