Senior Citizens Act can’t be misused to frustrate women’s rights under the DV Act: HC

Bombay HC strikes down Maintenance Tribunal order evicting woman from in-laws' home, balancing rights of senior citizens and women under DV Act.

MUMBAI: The Bombay high court (HC) on Monday struck down the order of a Maintenance Tribunal, set up under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, evicting a woman from the Juhu residence of her in-laws, observing that the machinery under the 2007 Act cannot be used for defeating right to residence in matrimonial home of women under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence (DV) Act, 2005.

HT Image

“No doubt, senior citizens are entitled to reside in their own house with peace and without any disturbance on account of marital discord between their son and daughter-in-law. But at the same time, the machinery under the Senior Citizens Act cannot be used for the purpose of defeating the rights of a woman under Section 17 of the DV Act,” said justice Sandeep Marne while striking down the Tribunal order.

Acting on a complaint filed by the mother-in-law of the woman, the Maintenance Tribunal had on September 18, 2023, ordered her and her husband to vacate their residence in the JVPD Scheme in Juhu. Married in 1997, the couple has a 26-year-old daughter, who is settled in the US, and a 21-year-old son, who is pursuing a management course in the city.

The relations between the spouses soured and in the first week of November 2022, the petitioner woman filed a police complaint against her husband. The family reacted to her move and her father-in-law and son lodged a counter complaint against her. Soon thereafter, the mother-in-law moved the Maintenance Tribunal for Western Suburbs levelling various allegations against her son and daughter-in-law and apart from monthly maintenance also sought their eviction from their Juhu residence.

On September 18, 2023, the Tribunal allowed her plea and ordered the eviction of the petitioner woman and her husband from the house. The woman then approached high court, contending that her estranged husband had misused the Tribunal through his mother-in-law to throw her out of her matrimonial home, even when her plea for protecting her right of residence was pending before a metropolitan magistrate court.

On Monday, the single judge bench of justice Sandeep Marne found substance in the woman’s contentions, though the counsel for the mother-in-law pointed out that the petitioner woman had gone to the extent of levelling allegations of sexual harassment against her father-in-law and the senior citizens cannot be made to live under the threat being implicated under false accusations.

In this regard, justice Marne said when there is a contest between the rights of senior citizens under the Senior Citizens Act and that of a woman under the DV Act, a “balancing act needs to be done and the rights of senior citizens cannot be decided in isolation.”

The court also noticed that though the woman’s husband was also directed to vacate the Juhu residence of her in-laws, he continued to reside in the flat and that the woman was not earning herself and that she had no other place to reside. “Therefore, petitioner cannot be rendered homeless to ensure peace of mind of the senior citizens,” the court said.