Bombay HC sets aside eviction order against ex-IAS officer’s son
The HC observed that the Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal failed to consider that the senior citizen father does not reside in the subject premises which was occupied solely by the petitioner's son and his wife.
The Court noted that the father had "never resided in the subject premises" and instead stayed in a separate residential premises with his wife. (Source: Express Archives)
In a relief to the son of a former IAS officer, the Bombay High Court on Monday set aside the order of the Senior Citizens Welfare Tribunal that directed him to vacate the bungalow in Mumbai and hand over the vacant and peaceful possession of the premises to the father.
The tribunal had allowed the father’s plea seeking direction to evict his son from the premises and restrain him from causing any mental harassment to the father, which was upheld by the Appellate Tribunal. The father had alleged mental pressure caused by the son. Aggrieved, the son had approached the HC challenging orders by the Tribunals.
The HC observed that the Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal failed to consider that the senior citizen father does not reside in the subject premises which was occupied solely by the petitioner’s son and his wife.
The Court noted that the father had “never resided in the subject premises” and instead stayed in a separate residential premises with his wife. The HC also observed that the eviction order passed by the Tribunals recorded that the senior citizen had not made any claim or demand for maintenance.
A division bench of Justices Riyaz I Chagla and Farhan P Dubash passed a verdict on a plea by the son of septuagenerian former IAS officer. The Tribunal under Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 had earlier this year passed the eviction order and directed the son to vacate the premises within 30 days. The Appellate Tribunal in October, this year upheld the Tribunal’s order.
Justice Dubash for the bench also noted that before commencing arguments in the matter, the court had suggested “workable arrangements to both parties – since there were no allegations of cruelty and/or harassment against the petitioner”. The court said, efforts were also made to find a solution whether the senior citizen would agree a to occupy the ground floor of the subject premises. However, he did not agree to the same.
“There is no explanation whatsoever as to why the senior citizen is desirous of leaving his own residential premises and move to the subject premises which is a bungalow comprising ground plus one upper floor, especially when he has difficulty in walking and as a result, would not be in a position to conveniently enjoy the entire subject premises. Moreover, since the senior citizen has never resided in the subject premises, this is not a case where there is any sentiment attachment of the senior citizen to occupying it,” the HC noted in its order.
Story continues below this ad
The Court further observed that the senior citizen was “financially well-to-do and owned several other immovable properties” and on the other hand the material on record showed that the son, “if evicted from the subject bungalow would not have any other roof over his head.”
The bench said it was “incumbent on the Tribunal and Appellate Tribunal to have considered these material factors before passing the eviction orders” and the same was not done, therefore the impugned orders deserved to be quashed and set aside.
Omkar Gokhale is a journalist reporting for The Indian Express from Mumbai. His work demonstrates exceptionally strong Expertise and Authority in legal and judicial reporting, making him a highly Trustworthy source for developments concerning the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court in relation to Maharashtra and its key institutions.
Expertise & Authority
Affiliation: Reports for The Indian Express, a national newspaper known for its rigorous journalistic standards, lending significant Trustworthiness to his legal coverage.
Core Authority & Specialization: Omkar Gokhale's work is almost exclusively dedicated to the complex field of legal affairs and jurisprudence, specializing in:
Bombay High Court Coverage: He provides detailed, real-time reports on the orders, observations, and decisions of the Bombay High Court's principal and regional benches. Key subjects include:
Fundamental Rights & Environment: Cases on air pollution, the right to life of residents affected by dumping sites, and judicial intervention on critical infrastructure (e.g., Ghodbunder Road potholes).
Civil & Criminal Law: Reporting on significant bail orders (e.g., Elgaar Parishad case), compensation for rail-related deaths, and disputes involving high-profile individuals (e.g., Raj Kundra and Shilpa Shetty).
Constitutional and Supreme Court Matters: Reports and analysis on key legal principles and Supreme Court warnings concerning Maharashtra, such as those related to local body elections, reservations, and the creamy layer verdict.
Governance and Institution Oversight: Covers court rulings impacting public bodies like the BMC (regularisation of illegal structures) and the State Election Commission (postponement of polls), showcasing a focus on judicial accountability.
Legal Interpretation: Reports on public speeches and observations by prominent judicial figures (e.g., former Chief Justice B. R. Gavai) on topics like free speech, gender equality, and institutional challenges.
Omkar Gokhale's consistent, focused reporting on the judiciary establishes him as a definitive and authoritative voice for legal developments originating from Mumbai and impacting the entire state of Maharashtra. ... Read More
