The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently ordered the eviction of a man, the adopted son of the respondent mother, from premises owned by his mother after he failed to maintain her.
The dispute arose when the mother, unable to reside peacefully in her own home, filed an eviction application under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. The Appellate Tribunal-cum-District Magistrate, Moga, had earlier ruled in her favor, ordering the eviction of the adopted son. Aggrieved by this decision, the son approached the High Court.
Background of the Case
The mother claimed that she and her husband had adopted the petitioner (the son), raised him with care, performed his marriage, and even provided him a house to reside with his wife and children. However, the son allegedly neglected his duties, abused his mother, quarrelled with his wife, and developed a drinking problem. Unable to live with him, the mother moved out and began staying with her relatives. She subsequently filed an application seeking his eviction from her property.
The Tribunal ruled in favor of the mother, prompting the son to challenge the order before the High Court.
High Court Proceedings
Before the High Court, the petitioner argued that since he was the adopted son of the respondent mother, the eviction order was unjust and arbitrary. He further claimed he had no other place to reside and was willing to take care of his mother.
On the other hand, counsel on behalf of the mother submitted that she had no alternative residence, and the son had persistently failed to provide any care or support. The counsel urged the court to uphold the Tribunal’s eviction order to allow the mother to return to her property and live peacefully.
Court’s Observation and Decision
The court noted that the property undisputedly belonged to the mother (respondent No. 3). Furthermore, the premises were locked and neglected by the son, who was employed as a driver and not residing in the house. It was also observed that his wife had returned to her parental home with their children.
The court emphasized that under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, senior citizens have the right to reside peacefully in their property. Since the son had no preferential right to occupy the premises over his mother, the court upheld the Tribunal’s order.
The High Court ruled:
“The property in question belongs to the respondent No. 3 (senior citizen)… The impugned order dated 13.12.2022 passed by the authorities concerned needs no interference at the hands of this Court, especially when the respondent No. 3 has no other place to reside. Hence, the petitioner is directed to vacate the property in question by 30.04.2025.”
The court further directed that if the petitioner failed to comply with the order, the respondent mother may seek police assistance to enforce the eviction.
Legal Representation
The petitioner was represented by Advocate M.S. Saini.
The respondent mother was represented by Advocate Sukhdev Raj Kamboj.
Case Title: Manpreet Singh v State of Punjab & Others (2025) (CWP-8272-2023)