HC orders former CJ's son to vacate father's house in 15 days
Eighty-five-year-old former Punjab and Haryana high court chief justice Shanti Sarup Dewan finally succeeded in getting his only son, advocate Suvir Dewan, thrown out of his Chandigarh house through court orders on Thursday since he had made his parents' life as “animal existence.”chandigarh Updated: Sep 26, 2013 23:36 IST
Eighty-five-year-old former Punjab and Haryana high court chief justice Shanti Sarup Dewan finally succeeded in getting his only son, advocate Suvir Dewan, thrown out of his Chandigarh house through court orders on Thursday since he had made his parents' life as “animal existence.”
Not only this, the high court also slapped a fine of `50,000 on Suvir, which he has been directed to pay to his father within 15 days. It has been ordered that Suvir, 49, along with his wife and daughter, would vacate his father's house and hand over the keys within 15 days and Chandigarh senior superintendent of police would ensure enforcement of court orders.
Former chief justice and his wife, Romilla, 74, had moved the court citing their “animal existence” in their own 500 sq yard house purchased in 1962 in Sector 11, Chandigarh, because of the alleged torture by their own son. The elderly couple had sought directions from the court for shifting Suvir, along with his family, from their house to Suvir's house in Sector 2, Panchkula.
The division bench comprising chief justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and justice Augustine George Masih also granted a month's time to the Chandigarh administration to take suitable steps to bring into force proper rules under Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, so as to protect the lives and property of senior citizens. The court clarified that the exercise should include a comprehensive action plan, including enforcement mechanism and conferring relevant powers to the district magistrate or officers subordinate to him.
The court, however, cleared that in case Suvir Dewan wanted to establish any legal right or share in his father's house, he was free to file appropriate civil proceedings without infringing the exclusive rights of his parents in the interim period.
Feelings of Dismay
The court said, “We part with the feelings of dismay at the attitude of respondent No. 7 (Suvir Dewan) despite all efforts by the committee and the court but with the hope that at some stage sanity would dawn and he would recognise the contribution made by his father, including monetarily, towards establishing him in an independent house gifted to him.”
The court observed that it was quite clear that not only Suvir Dewan wanted to deprive his father to deal with his property as per his wishes but wanted to grab the whole property for himself, denying the share of his two sisters.
“What can be a greater travesty of justice in this situation where Suvir Dewan insists that he will not stay in his own house built by him lying vacant, but insists on staying with his parents who do not want him or his family to live with them,” the court said.