HANS RAJ Vs. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, FATEHGARH SAHIB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Prayer in this appeal is for setting aside order dtd. 12/3/2025, whereby learned Single Bench has dismissed CWP-32253-2024, filed by present appellants/writ petitioners challenging order dtd. 15/6/2022, passed by the Additional District Magistrate, Fatehgarh Sahib and a direction has been issued to appellants to vacate the house in question.

(2.) Brief facts necessary for adjudication of the matter are that respondents no.2 and 3 i.e. parents of appellant no. 1 and parents-in-law of appellant no. 2, filed an application under Sec. 23 of Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (for short 2007 Act), seeking eviction of appellants from the property in question which is stated to be their self acquired property, on the ground that appellants misbehaved with them, physically abused them and also pressurized them to transfer ownership of house in question, in their favour. Additional District Magistrate, Fatehgarh Sahib called for a report from the Sub Divisional Magistrate Amloh, District Fatehgarh Sahib. On receipt of application and as per report submitted by Sub Divisional Magistrate, Amloh, it was verified that respondent No. 2 - Mr. Achhru Ram is owner of property in question whereon residential house has been constructed. Additional District Magistrate, Fatehgarh Sahib, on considering the facts and circumstances concluded that appellants were misbehaving with respondents and were pressurizing them to transfer ownership of area in question in their favour and averments on part of appellants that they are ready and willing to look-after applicants and fulfill their domestic daily needs, found no favour. It was thus, directed vide order dtd. 15/6/2022, that the premises be vacated within one month and possession be delivered to respondents-applicants.

(3.) Aggrieved therefrom appellants filed CWP-30208-2022 for setting aside order dtd. 15/6/2022. Learned Single Bench upon considering the facts and circumstances of the case found no merit in the arguments raised on behalf of appellants. It was concluded that property in question was owned by applicants-respondents who are admittedly senior citizens and that they had been subjected to humiliation and even physical abuse with injuries being inflicted which even led to admission in the hospital with a medico legal report being prepared as well, however, no action was taken by the Senior Citizens because of intervention of other relatives. Learned Single Bench also took note of certain pictures brought on record which indicated appellant no. 1 seemingly inflicting injuries upon respondents No. 2 and 3 i.e. the senior citizens. It was thus, held by learned Single Bench that life of said applicants-respondents is in danger at the hands of appellants in case they are allowed to live in the same premises. There was nothing on record to indicate that senior citizens owned any other accommodation or had any other means to survive. Writ petition was accordingly dismissed and authorities were directed to immediately implement the order directing eviction of appellants. Aggrieved there from present appeal has been filed.