While firmly espousing, endorsing and vindicating the right of the woman to her matrimonial home, the Allahabad High Court has in an extremely brilliant, bold, balanced and brief 10-page judgment titled Smt. Khushboo Shukla vs District Magistrate, Lucknow & Ors in Misc. Single No. – 16212 of 2021 delivered just recently on November 2, 2021 has made it explicitly clear that the wife cannot be ousted from her matrimonial home on the basis of the summary proceedings under the Senior Citizens Act, 2007. It must be mentioned here that the Single Judge Bench comprising of Hon’ble Justice Vivek Chaudhary of Lucknow Bench of Allahabad High Court while setting an exemplary trend came to the aid of a widow by setting aside an eviction order passed against her and her son from her in-laws house. Most brilliantly, Justice Vivek while referring to the December 2020 ruling of the Apex Court in the case of S Vanitha vs Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District [Civil Appeal No. 3822 of 2020] thus held that, “Senior Citizens Act, 2007 and PWDV Act, 2005 are to be read simultaneously and a wife cannot be ousted from her matrimonial home on the basis of the summary proceedings under the Senior Citizens Act, 2007.”
The parties of the matter got married in the year 2013. Initially, they were living with the parents of the husband. However, soon thereafter certain family disputes arose and, therefore, petitioner and her husband started living separately on the ground floor of the house. In 2015, a son was born out of the wedlock. Husband of petitioner expired on leaving behind his minor son, wife and his parents. Petitioner alleges that after the death of her husband, respondents started harassing her, including for dowry. In the said background, she lodged several F.I.Rs.
By the said complaint case, she sought maintenance for herself and her son and also prayed for restraining the respondents from dispossessing the petitioner and her son from the house wherein she was residing since before the death of her husband. Meanwhile,respondents also filed a case under Rule 21 and 22 of the Senior Citizens Rules, 2014. By the said case, the private respondents asked for possession of house by evicting the petitioner from the same.
By order Special Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (A.P.), Lucknow in Complaint Case was filed by petitioner and granted maintenance per month to her son and further restricted the private respondents from evicting the petitioner from the house. Soon thereafter, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Lucknow filed by private respondents passed the impugned order directing eviction of the petitioner from the house within 15 days of receiving the award. Thus, the present writ petition is filed challenging the order.”
Under Rule 21(2)(i), the District Magistrate is to ensure that life and property of senior citizens are protected and they are able to live with security and dignity. In exercise of the said powers, the proceedings are held by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Lucknow and impugned order of eviction is passed. There is no appeal provided against an order passed under Rule 22 of the Senior Citizens, Rules, 2014 and the rules are silent in this regard.
Photo by Andrew Coop on Unsplash
About the author
