LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Roshni B.. (For justice and dignity)     14 April 2011

Man turns the tables on parents in maintenance case


Man turns the tables on parents in maintenance case




An 87-year-old man recently moved a city court to seek maintenance from his 60-year-old son, seeking its intervention to ensure that he and his octogenarian wife were not left in penury in the twilight of their lives.

Raising issues pertaining to their ill-health and financial incapability, the petitioner claimed their son was dodging his responsibility despite occupying a prominent position in the State Trading Corporation of India Ltd. “Let us at least get Rs 20,000 towards expenditure, and Rs 40,000 towards medical and other treatment-related expenses,” he said, seeking interim relief till the time the petition was decided by a magisterial court.

However, the case — which seemed so convincingly in favour of the parents at first glance — took an intriguing turn when it was revealed that the parents possessed substantial wealth, whereas the son was retired from service and had three daughters to marry off.


The matter came to light after the son disclosed before Additional Sessions Judge R K Chauhan that while his parents owned three properties in the city, he had retired from his job in September 2009 and was living on a pension of Rs 1,623 every month.

The documents produced by the son revealed that his father owned not just a furniture shop at Kirti Nagar, but also an industrial plot measuring 100 sq metres alotted by the Delhi State Industrial Development with a market value of Rs 50 lakh. The mother, he claimed, owned a house in Mansarovar Garden. Documentary evidence such as income tax returns and property tax papers were produced to corroborate his contention.


“It is therefore submitted that petitioners, who are the owners of various immovable properties in Delhi and are gainfully employed in the furniture business, under no circumstances require maintenance as sought in their favour,” the response to the parent’s petition stated.

While the parents’ counsel dismissed the argument that the couple did not need compensation, he could not negate the claim that they owned the three immovable properties in the Capital. While the father contended that they were not earning anything from the properties, ASJ Chauhan took note of the fact that “the properties are, undoubtedly, situated in commercial and fairly good residential colonies”.

Citing previous verdicts by superior courts, the judge noted that while passing an order, he would not only have to consider the requirements of the applicant but conversely, the requirements of the non-applicant as well. Looking into the case, ASJ Chauhan noted that there was nothing on record to establish that the parents lacked the means to maintain themselves, or that the son was earning so much that he must be asked to contribute to their cause.


“There is no sufficient material to disclose a prima facie case in favour of the petitioners, to grant them interim maintenance,” the court held, asking the parties to appear before the magistrate concerned.


 2 Replies

Tajobsindia (Senior Partner )     14 April 2011

@ #

Perfecto.......judiciary is waking up to child rights after all. Reminds me of a old Youtube stuff 

[First parents dole out lollipops for homely desi wife all his kids years and then when the child becomes man and gets married and comes to his sunshine years they ask money back with interest]……………yeh hai mera Bharat Mahan……….

Moral of news: poor kid!! after 60 years it was other
 way round J  

zimmerzapper (student)     14 April 2011

great news.

Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  

Recent Topics

View More

Related Threads


Popular Discussion

view more »

Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query