NISHA.G. Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL UNDER KERALA MAINTENANCE AND WELFARE OF PARENTS AND SENIOR CITIZENS ACT, 2007)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The first petitioner is the grand daughter of the third respondent. The other petitioners are children of the third respondent. The third respondent executed a settlement deed in favour of the first petitioner on 24.1.2015. The third respondent approached the Maintenance Tribunal to revoke the deed. This was declined by Ext.P2 order stating that it is only a property dispute. Thereupon, the third respondent approached the Appellate Authority. In the appeal, petitioners 2 and 3 were also arrayed as parties. Taking note of the fact that basic amenities, physical needs are being deprived to the third respondent, the Appellate Authority directed the first petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 4,000/-per month and other petitioners to pay a sum of Rs. 1,000/- each per month to the third respondent. It is challenging this order, the petitioner approached this Court.

(2.) According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the Appellate Authority impleaded respondents 2 and 4 in the appeal without following the procedures. It is further argued that the order of maintenance has been passed without adverting to the fact that the first petitioner had already made a deposit of Rs. 1,00,000/- in favour of the third respondent.

(3.) The learned counsel for the third respondent would argue that the petitioners cannot wriggle out from the legal obligations to provide the maintenance to the third respondent.