Old parents not looked after by children as traditional joint family system withering away: Allahabad High Court

The traditional joint family system in India has been withering away and that is why a large number of old aged parents are not being looked after by their children, the Allahabad High Court recently observed [Krishna Kumar vs State of Uttar Pradesh]..Justice Shree Prakash Singh made the observation while quashing a sub-divisional magistrate court's order evicting a son from his parents' house.In a verdict passed on August 18, the Court noted that the objective of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 is to provide for more effective provisions for the maintenance and welfare of parents and senior citizens.The Act is meant to provide a mechanism for the need-based maintenance to parents and senior citizens, including medical facilities for the protection of their life and property and to set up old age homes in every district, the bench said.The bench added that nowadays, due to a steady rise in population, older persons in India are seen suffering on account of malnutrition and the unavailability of medicines and treatment. The Court further remarked that traditional norms and values of Indian society emphasised on showing respect and caring for the aged members of the family who were normally cared for by the family itself."But, in the recent time, the society is witnessing a gradual definite withering of joint family system and therefore, a large number of parents are not being maintained by their children," the judge observed.The Court opined that it is an established fact that the family is the most desired environment for senior citizens or aged parents to lead a life of security, care, and dignity."In this view of the fact and to ensure that the children should perform their moral obligation towards their parents, the Act, 2007 aims to create an enabling mechanism for the older persons ‘To Claim Need Based Maintenance From Their Children’," the judge added..In the case at hand, a sub-divisional Magistrate had ordered eviction of the petitioner in 2019 from his parents' house on allegations that he often physically and mentally assaulted his old parents.On the other hand, the petitioner contended that his family (father, mother and two sisters) were annoyed with him for marrying a woman from the Scheduled Caste (SC) category, and therefore, they wanted to oust him from his house. He alleged that his sisters were forcing his parents to sell the house in question.The bench noted that the petitioner was living on one side of the house with his wife and children and that he also possessed a shop within the house, which was his source of income..Taking note of this, the bench opined that there is a need to re-examine whether the petitioner was actually avoiding taking care of his parents. "As per the social structure of the society, sometimes, a son may not be in a position to maintain the parents, as particularly, in the present matter, the petitioner is residing in one room and there are other rooms, where the parents can live, therefore, it is needed to revisit the whole scenario that as to whether the present petitioner, is actually avoiding to maintain the parents," the Court said.Moreover, the bench noted that the District Magistrate, being an appellate authority under the Senior Citizen's Act, can ensure that no one hindered a senior citizen from enjoying the property as per his needs. Eviction is the last step in such cases when the authority finds that the needs of a senior citizen are not being fulfilled, the Court added.As such, the Court quashed the petitioner's eviction and directed him not to inconvenience the needful living of his parents within the house. "The case in hands is that the present petitioner is living in one room with his wife and he is not making any hindrance in the peaceful living of the parents, in other part of the house and therefore, so far as the objective of the Act, 2007 is concerned, is no way hampered by the petitioner. Consequently, the eviction order is quashed," the judge held..Advocates Amol Kumar and Shivanshu Mishra appeared for the Petitioner.Advocates Piyush Pathak, RP Shukla, Sharad Pathak, Sukhdeo Singh and Vidya Bhushan Pande represented the Respondents..[Read Judgment]