SOURABH MAINI Vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, GURUGRAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The afore-captioned Letters Patent Appeal and Civil Revision are being taken up together for discussion and adjudication as these have arisen out of the lis pertaining to the same subject matter between the members of the same family, headed by one C.K. Maini (since deceased).

(2.) Before adverting to the discussion on the merits of the above- referred cases separately, we deem it expedient to have a bird's eye-view of the undisputed facts, culminating in the filing thereof. The wife of said C.K. Maini named Shashi Maini, arrayed as respondent No.3 in the LPA and respondent No.1 in the Civil Revision (here-in-after to be referred as 'the senior citizen'), is the mother of Sourabh Maini and mother-in-law of Ashima Maini (appellants No.1 and 2 in the LPA and here-in-after to be referred as 'the son and daughter-in-law' respectively). The house bearing No.1132, Sector 17-B, IFFCO Nagar, IFFCO Chowk, Gurugram (for short 'the subject property'), which is the bone of contention between the parties herein, belongs to the senior citizen, by way of its purchase by her husband in her name vide registered Conveyance-Deed dtd. 15/12/1997. However, the son had preferred a petition under Sec. 276 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 for seeking the probate on the basis of an unregistered Will dtd. 1/10/2012, by claiming that his father had executed the same and had, thereby, created only a life-time interest in favour of the senior citizen in respect of his (father's) movable and immovable properties, including the subject property but it is pertinent to mention here that vide the order (copy annexed as R-3/4 in LPA) as passed by learned Additional District Judge, Gurugram on 27/10/2022, the afore-said petition had been rejected while allowing the application, as moved by the senior citizen and her daughter (arrayed as respondents No.2 & 3 therein) under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.

(3.) Letters Patent Appeal No.764 of 2024 has been preferred by the son and daughter-in-law to lay challenge to the judgment handed down by learned Single Judge on 19/10/2023, qua the dismissal of the Civil Writ Petition No.25202 of 2022, filed by them to impugn the order Annexure P-1, as passed by the District Magistrate on 7/9/2022 in the application/ complaint/petition Annexure P-8 (for short 'the application') moved by the senior citizen under Ss. 23(2)(i) and 5 of the Haryana Maintenance of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (for short 'the Senior Citizens Act'), whereby they have been directed to vacate the subject property within one month from the date of the order and also to pay maintenance allowance to the senior citizen @ Rs.10,000.00 per month. The senior citizen had filed the above-mentioned application against the appellants-son and daughter-in- law and had averred therein that after the demise of her husband, they (son and daughter-in-law) took control over all her (senior citizen's) bank and DEMAT accounts, assets and securities as well as her debit and credit cards as she was not technically proficient enough, so as to operate or use the same and later-on, they did not let her operate or to have access to the afore- said accounts etc. and rather, the son sold her shares worth Rs.92.00 lacs (having the current value of Rs.3.25 crore approximately), redeemed the fixed-deposits worth Rs.30.00 lacs and withdrew/transferred and utilized more than Rs.1.06 crore from her bank accounts and refused to return the amount so received/withdrawn by him and thus, he and the daughter-in-law had siphoned-off her assets on the pretext/false assurance that they would take care of her basic needs. The daughter-in-law used to pick-up arguments and quarrels with her over trivial matters and to, thereby, cause humiliation leading to grave mental trauma for her and they (the son and daughter- in- law) had ousted her from the possession of the properties, purchased by her late husband in her name, including the subject property.