In view of this, the Court inferred that no case was made out by the son and dismissed his plea seeking to set aside eviction order. (Representational Image) In view of this, the Court inferred that no case was made out by the son and dismissed his plea seeking to set aside eviction order. (Representational Image)

The Bombay High Court observed that the ancestral property of a family can pass on to the son through the parents, and the life, dignity, liberty, and property of the parents is of paramount importance.

Observing this, a single judge bench of Justice Sadhana S Jadhav refused to intervene in an eviction order passed by sub-divisional officer restraining the son and his wife from residing with his aged parents and allowing them to live peacefully in their house in Mumbai.

Justice Jadhav passed an order last month in a plea filed by the son challenging an eviction order. The son told the court that he and his wife had been living in the ancestral property for a long time and eviction was invalid and arbitrary.

The son claimed that the property was not self-acquired by the parents and therefore he and his wife had right to stay in the house. He contended that his parents had subjected the daughter-in-law to indignities. It was also argued by advocate Nilesh Ojha for the son that the sub-divisional officer was not empowered to pass an eviction order.

Advocate Niranjan Mundargi representing the parents said that they had filed a cheating case against their son for misappropriating nearly Rs 2 crore from their two bank accounts when they had gone to visit their daughter in Singapore.

It was also claimed by the parents that upon their return from Singapore, they came to know about misappropriation in their absence and therefore filed an FIR. The parents said that the son and his wife had started harassing them and even though parents arranged for the son’s bail, the harassment continued and therefore the sub-divisional officer, who passed eviction order, was approached.

The bench was informed by the petitioner, the son, that he and his wife are residing in the share which is allotted to his uncle on the upper floor of the ancestral property. In view of this, the Court inferred that no case was made out by the son and dismissed his plea seeking to set aside eviction order.

However, in respect of ancestral property and well-being of aged parents under the Maintenance of Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizen Act, 2007, the court noted that object of the special law is to be achieved by all means to protect interests of parents and senior citizens to let them live peacefully and with dignity.

Justice Sadhana Jadhav dismissed the plea and observed, “Although the said property is ancestral property, the Court cannot be oblivious of the fact that the interest in the said property, would devolve upon the petitioner (son) through the parents. As on today, the life, liberty, dignity and property of the respondents is of paramount importance.”

📣 The Indian Express is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel (@indianexpress) and stay updated with the latest headlines

For all the latest Mumbai News, download Indian Express App.

© IE Online Media Services Pvt Ltd