Gujarat High Court
Kamleshkumari Shravankumar Shukla vs Parvatiben Ramprasad Shukla & 3 on 13 April, 2016
Author: N.V.Anjaria
Bench: N.V.Anjaria
C/SCA/10700/2015 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10700 of 2015
==========================================================
KAMLESHKUMARI SHRAVANKUMAR SHUKLA....Petitioner(s)
Versus
PARVATIBEN RAMPRASAD SHUKLA & 3....Respondent(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
HCLS COMMITTEE, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR JEET J BHATT, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Respondent(s) No. 3 - 4
MR TEJAS D SHUKLA, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR VAIBHAV A VYAS, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
Date : 13/04/2016
ORAL ORDER
Heard learned advocate Mr. Jeet Bhatt for the petitioner, learned advocate Mr. Vaibhav Vyas for respondent No.1 and learned advocate Mr. Tejas Shukla for respondent No.2.
2. The impugned orders are the production of proceedings initiated by respondent No.1-mother-in-law under the Maintenance and Welfare of the Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 seeking maintenance of Rs. 3000/- per month each from daughter-in-law-the petitioner herein as well as from the son-respondent No.2 herein. The Deputy collector passed order upon application of mother-in-law-respondent No.1 herein, whereby the son was directed to pay Rs. 8000/- as monthly maintenance. It further directed to permit the mother-in-law to use two rooms in the premises being house No. 547/3560, Vidhyanchal Nagar, Gujarat Housing Colony, Chandkheda, Ahmedabad . The mother-in-law felt Page 1 of 2 HC-NIC Page 1 of 2 Created On Sun Apr 17 02:05:24 IST 2016 C/SCA/10700/2015 ORDER aggrieved by the aforesaid order, which apparently was in her favour.
3. The mother-in-law wanted the entire house. Therefore, Appeal No. 7 of 14 was preferred before the Collector. The Collector modified the order by providing Rs. 4000/- per month as maintenance to be paid to the mother-in-law. The Collector further directed to hand-over back the possession of the house in question to the mother-in- law.
4. By passing the impugned order of the aforesaid nature, Prima facie the Collector has assumed the role of the civil court. Whatever may be the case of the respondent No.1-mother-in-law in relation to the claim of house, it has to be got decided in appropriate civil proceedings. An authority acting under the Maintenance and Welfare of the Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, does not have power to enforce eviction or issue directions to hand over possession of the property from one party to another.
5. A strong prima facie case is therefore made out. Therefore, Rule. Ad-interim relief granted earlier stands confirmed and shall operate as interim relief during the pendency of the petition. Learned advocate for the petitioner states that the petitioner is ready to keep mother-in-law in the house with her as per order of Deputy Collector.
(N.V.ANJARIA, J.) cmjoshi Page 2 of 2 HC-NIC Page 2 of 2 Created On Sun Apr 17 02:05:24 IST 2016