‘In today’s age, children take parents to court instead of pilgrimage’: Bombay HC on son’s plea for restraining order against parents
The Bombay High Court directed the Mumbai-based son seeking an order to restrain his parents from using his residence for visits related to medical treatment to ensure no inconvenience is caused to them.
“In today’s age, there is something very seriously wrong in the upbringing of our children that a child is taking the parents to the Court instead of the pilgrimage.”
Expressing concerns over a plea by a man seeking a restraining order against his parents presently living in Kolhapur from using his residence in the western suburbs for visits related to medical treatment in Mumbai, the Bombay High Court Thursday directed the petitioner to ensure no inconvenience is caused to parents and they are treated with “utmost respect, love and care.”
The high court passed the order on a plea by the son challenging the order of City Civil Court that in January 2018 refused his prayer seeking injunction against the parents from making use of his residential premises in western suburbs.
Citing ‘Shravan Kumar’, a single-judge bench of Justice Jitendra S Jain observed, “This is one more instance and sorry state of affairs where a son instead of discharging the moral duty of taking care of his ailing and aged parents has filed a suit seeking restrain order. The moral values inculcated in our culture have fallen to such an extent that we have forgotten Shravan Kumar who took his parents for pilgrimage and on the way laid down his life.
“In today’s age, there is something very seriously wrong in the upbringing of our children that a child is taking the parents to the Court instead of the pilgrimage.”
Justice Jain went on to observe, “As caring for one’s parents is not just a sacred and moral duty, it’s a labour of love that comes full circle because when you choose to honour, love, respect and care for your parents, it’s not just the expression of one’s gratitude, but it is honouring God himself. Sadly the harsh reality is sometimes totally otherwise, when you realise that parents can take care of ten children, but sometimes ten children cannot take care of their parents.”
The bench noted that the defendants have three sons including one residing in Mumbai, another in Navi Mumbai and the third in Kolhapur and they have to regularly visit Mumbai for medical treatment.
Justice Jain emphasised the need of passing order for an interim arrangement without getting into the facts of the case and “without writing anything further on the present day children’s attitude and treatment meted out to the parents.”
Story continues below this ad
The Bombay High Court asked the parents to inform their Mumbai-based son about their hospital visits and asked him and his wife to receive them on arrival in the city, accompany them to his residence, and accompany and assist during treatment. The son is also required to bear all related expenses. After treatment, he should ensure their safe return home without inconvenience and arrange travel when parents would want to visit their other sons.
The court clarified that in case of breach of its order or inconvenience caused to parents, the son will be held in contempt of the order and appropriate proceedings will be initiated against him.
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
