Bombay High Court Rules In Favor Of The Parents Over Son In A Property Dispute

Bombay High Court Rules In Favor Of The Parents Over Son In A Property Dispute
Bombay High Court Rules In Favor Of The Parents Over Son In A Property Dispute

Considering the life, liberty, dignity, and property of the parents is of utmost importance, Bombay High Court observed that a family’s ancestral property can be passed on to the son through the parents.

Observing this, a single judge bench of Justice Sadhana S Jadhav declined to interfere in an eviction order passed by the sub-divisional officer that restricted the son and his wife from residing with his aged parents and allowing them to live peacefully at their residence 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 the ancestral property was not self-acquired by his parents and therefore he and his wife have the right to reside in the property.

The son also contended that he and his wife had been living in the ancestral property for a long time and the eviction demanded by his parents from the property was not applicable on him and was arbitrary.

The son also contented that his parents had subjected his wife to indignities. Advocate Nilesh Ojha on behalf of the son argued that the sub-divisional officer did not possess the power to pass an eviction order.

On the contrary, the parent’s lawyer, Advocate Niranjan Mundargi said that the parents had filed a cheating case against their son for misappropriating a sum of nearly Rs 2 crore from their two bank accounts when they were out of the country to visit their daughter in Singapore.

It was after returning back from the trip, they came to know about the misappropriation caused by their son and therefore and therefore filed an FIR against him.

The parents told the court that the son and his wife had started harassing them and despite the parents had made arrangements for the son’s bail, the harassment persisted and therefore the parents approached the sub-divisional officer who passed the eviction order.

The petitioner (son) informed the court 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.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here