PIARE KHAN VS. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS
High Court of Delhi at New Delhi | W.P.(C) 14078/2023 | Judgment Dated: 21.11.2025**
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sachin Datta
Facts:
The petitioner, Piare Khan, a senior citizen, filed a writ petition challenging the order dated 28.08.2023 passed by the Appellate Authority (Divisional Commissioner), which set aside the eviction order dated 24.03.2022 issued by the District Magistrate (West) under the .Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007
The subject property is ,Y-21A, DDA Flat, New Ranjeet Nagar, Delhi, where the petitioner resides on the first floor with his wife. The second floor was occupied by his daughter (Respondent No. 2), her husband, and their family.
The petitioner allowed his daughter and her family to reside in the property temporarily in 2014, later executing a rent agreement. Relations soured, leading to allegations of ill-treatment and harassment.
Procedural History:
– The District Magistrate ordered eviction in March 2022, citing ill-treatment and harassment.
– The Appellate Authority set aside the eviction order, reasoning that:
– No ill-treatment or harassment was proven.
– The dispute was civil in nature and not maintainable under the Senior Citizens Act.
– The petitioner approached the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Key Legal Issues:
1. Whether proof of ill-treatment or non-maintenance is a prerequisite for eviction under the Senior Citizens Act?
2. Whether a senior citizen can seek eviction of legal heirs from a property in which they have a right or interest, even if not exclusive ownership?
3. Whether the summary proceedings under the Act can be invoked when civil disputes over title exist?
Court’s Reasoning and Findings:
– The High Court emphasized that the ,Senior Citizens Act, 2007 is a beneficial and welfare legislationaimed at protecting the life, property, and dignity of senior citizens.
– It referred to several precedents, including:
Urmila Dixit v. Sunil Sharan Dixit (SC)
-Sandeep Gulati v. Divisional Commissioner (Del HC)
-Pritam Singh v. GNCTD (Del HC)
– The Court held that:
-Ill-treatment is not a mandatory precondition for eviction under Rule 22(3)(1) of the Delhi Senior Citizen Rules, especially where the children have no right or interest in the property.
– A senior citizen only needs to establish a right or interest in the property, which may be less than exclusive ownership (e.g., a right of residence or possession).
– The summary proceeding under the Act is designed for speedy relief and is not meant to decide title disputes. Civil courts are barred from interfering in such matters under Section 27 of the Act.
– The mental and physical well-being of the senior citizen is paramount.
Decision:
– The High Court set aside the Appellate Authority’s order and restored the eviction order dated 24.03.2022.
– Respondents 2 to 7 were directed to vacate the second floor within 4 weeks
– The Deputy Commissioner of Police was directed to ensure compliance.
– Respondents were restrained from harassing the petitioner during this period.
Significance:
– This judgment reinforces the pro-senior citizen interpretation of the 2007 Act.
– It clarifies that property disputes or delayed complaints do not negate the rights of senior citizens to seek eviction.
– The ruling strengthens the summary and protective mechanism under the Act, ensuring that senior citizens can live in peace and security.
Conclusion:
The judgment underscores the judiciary’s commitment to upholding the dignity and rights of senior citizens through a liberal and purpose-oriented interpretation of welfare legislation.
