KASUPA GOWRAMMA Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:-

(2.) The case of the petitioners is that while petitioner No.2 while working in the BDL, had purchased the house bearing Municipal No.18/7/607/8/26 admeasuring 146 square yards, situated at Danaiah Nagar, Uppuguda, Hyderabad, in the name of his wife i.e., petitioner No.1, under registered sale deed dtd. 16/6/1998 bearing document No.1146 of 1998. It is further case of the petitioners that they were blessed with two daughters and one son and performed their marriages. The respondent No.8 is the wife of their son-respondent No.7 and they lived comfortably with respondent Nos.7 and 8 and in the year, 2010, petitioner No.2 retired from service and he was paid an amount of Rs.9.00 lakhs as retirement benefits and since then, respondent No.7 started demanding money for extending his business and finally petitioner No.2 paid an amount of Rs.4.00 lakhs to respondent No.7. It is further case of the petitioners that respondent No.7 has taken three tolas of gold ornaments and did not return the same. It is the specific case of petitioners that on 26/1/2016, respondent Nos.7 and 8 have thrown out them from their house and creating problems on one pretext or the other. It is the further case of the petitioners that taking advantage of their old age, the respondent Nos.7 and 8 by hook or crook wanted to grab the house property purchased by petitioner No.2 in the name of petitioner No.1. Vexed with the attitude of the respondent Nos.7 and 8, the petitioners have filed an application before respondent No.3 under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred as "Senior Citizens Act") and the Telangana Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2011 (for short "Rules") seeking protection and maintenance, in Case No.D/524/2021. Vide orders dtd. 11/8/2021, respondent No.3 directed respondent Nos.7 and 8 herein, to pay Rs.10,000.00 per month to the petitioners. Questioning the said orders, the petitioners filed an appeal before respondent No.2 vide Case No.A/305/2022 and the same was dismissed on 4/6/2022. It is further case of the petitioners that though the petitioners lodged complaints, dtd. 3/8/2022 and 22/9/2022 to respondent No.6 seeking protection from the respondent Nos.7 and 8, the respondent No.6 has not acted upon the said complaints for providing protection to the life and liberty of the petitioners from the constant harassment and mental torture by the respondent Nos.7 and 8. Hence, the writ petition.

(3.) On 27/10/2023, when the matter came up for hearing, this Court, passed the following interim order: