Synopsis: The Bench observed that a remedy under the Uttar Pradesh Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, was available to the aggrieved party.
Former Justice Anjani Kumar and his wife were ordered by the Allahabad High Court to approach the District Magistrate of Prayagraj, with their complaints. The former judge and his wife brought a plea against their own son for unlawfully evicting them from their own home.
Shashi Kant Gupta and Pankaj Bhatia noted that under the Uttar Pradesh Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 and Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2014, the petitioners will get the remedy.
It has been further observed, that although the aforementioned laws have been enacted by the Legislature, no procedure has been given for the execution of the orders passed thereunder.
Advocate Tarun Agrawal, appearing on behalf of the petitioners, told the Court that the house at issue was also registered in the name of the petitioners, apart from other properties.
He further argued that the son had no right to forcibly evict the petitioners because the name of the petitioner was documented in the records of Nagar Nigam.
In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the High Court granted the petitioners the freedom to file an effective application before the District Magistrate, Prayagraj, in compliance with the laws of the State, within ten days, including the relevant documents.
The petitioner’s son was ordered to appear before the District Magistrate on November 19.
Furthermore, within a span of two months from the date of receipt of the said application/petition, the District Magistrate was asked to pass a reasoned order concerning all the issues posed by the parties.
In the event that the petitioners feel aggrieved by the order of the District Magistrate, the Bench added that they had the right to put a copy of the said order before the High Court for its review and for the passing of further orders.
The High Court made it clear that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and that the parties were free to refer all the questions to the District Magistrate.
The matter is listed for further orders on February 8, 2021.