← Library
Madras High CourtWP/20799/2023disposed of

S.Murugesan v. Senior Citizen Maintenance And Welfare

2024-12-16Honourable Mr Justice C.V. Karthikeyan4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 16.12.2024

CORAM

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN W.P.No.20799 of 2023 and W.M.P.No.20178 of 2023 S.Murugan .. Petitioner Vs.

1.The Senior Citizen Maintenance and Welfare Tribunal and the Revenue Divisional Officer, Coimbatore.

2.Shanmugam 3.Vinmathi 4.Parameshwari 5.Jothimani 6.Savithri .. Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari Mandamus, calling for the records in respect of the order passed by the 1st respondent in pa.mu.4062/2023/A1 dated 20.05.2023 and quash the same and may direct the 1st respondent to direct the 3 to 6th respondent

and their children not to enter into the petitioner's property to meet the respondent No.2.

For Petitioner .. Mr.C.Deivasiganmani For Respondents .. Mr.Vadivelu Deenadayalan Additional Government Pleader for R1

ORDER

The son of the 2nd respondent has filed the present writ petition questioning an order dated 20.05.2023 issued by the 1st respondent, Senior Citizen Maintenance and Welfare Tribunal and the Revenue Divisional Officer at Coimbatore.

2.There is actually no adversarial lis between the parties. The 2nd respondent is staying with the petitioner. But the 2nd respondent however also has four other daughters and they been impleaded as 3-6th respondents. It is contended that if they come to visit the 2nd respondent in the house of the petitioner, for some reason, the petitioner does not to permit cordiality to prevail in that meeting. This is the main grievance. There is no grievance that the petitioner is not taking care of the 2nd respondent.

3.It is contended by the petitioner that the directions given by the 1st respondent that the petitioner should also encourage the 3-6th respondents to visit the house is beyond the scope of the remit of the 2nd respondent. To that limited extent, that is statement correct. But human relationship and family relationship go beyond the law. Within a family it is only appropriate that all members of the family interact with each and everyone of them regularly. The denial of companionship of the daughters is also mental cruelty on the father, particularly when the mother is not alive. But there may be reasons why the petitioner has to deny the presence of the 3-6 respondent in his house. 4.Let me place an alternate for consideration.

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J.

ssr 3-6th respondents have with the petitioner. No orders are required. The directions that the petitioner should not prevent the 3-6th respondents from entering into the house is beyond the scope of the enquiry of the 2nd respondent. 5.This writ petition is disposed of. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

16.12.2024 Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order ssr To The Senior Citizen Maintenance and Welfare Tribunal and the Revenue Divisional Officer, Coimbatore.

W.P.No.20799 of 2023 and W.M.P.No.20178 of 2023