RAJESHKUMAR Vs. KAMLABAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Bhoyar, learned counsel for the petitioners.

(2.) The petition questions the order dtd. 26/4/2022 passed by the learned Sub Divisional officer, whereby the respondent No.1 has sought maintenance of Rs.40,000.00 per month and possession of the house where the petitioners are residing on the ground that the petitioners have neglected to maintain the respondent No.1 and thereby an amount of Rs.10,000.00 has been awarded as maintenance and so also the petitioners have been directed to provide accommodation in their house to the respondent No.1. The appeal against the aforesaid order has been rejected by the learned Collector by the order dtd. 25/11/2022 (page 53). It is contended, that the respondent No.1 have two sons and two daughters and she has been residing with her second son Anilkumar Patni who is representing the respondent No.1. It is contended, that the application has been filed only against the petitioners seeking maintenance, without any explanation as to how the residence of the respondent No.1 with her son Anilkumar Patni is inadequate. It is also contended, that since she resides with the second son since 2006 without considering all these things, the impugned orders have been passed. My attention is also invited to the observations of the learned Collector in para 8 (page 56) of the impugned order which it is contended are in favour of the petitioners. The entire amount of maintenance upon instructions is stated to have been deposited by the petitioners in the account of the respondent No.1, accepting which statement as the statement to the Court, issue notice for final disposal to the respondents, returnable on 3/7/2023.

(3.) Mr. Patil, learned AGP waives notice for the respondent Nos. 2 and 3/State.