Disposed

Mamta @ Anita v. Sh. Laxmi Narayan and Ors.

Delhi HC20 May 2024W.P.(C)/1352/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged a District Magistrate's order directing her eviction from a property under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens framework. With the court noting an efficacious appellate remedy under Section 16, counsel sought withdrawal; the petition was permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to appeal within 45 days and interim protection continued.

What did the court decide?

Petition withdrawn with liberty to file appeal before Appellate Tribunal within 45 days; interim order dated 05.02.2020/2022 continued till disposal of appeal; Section 14 Limitation Act benefit allowe

Mamta @ Anita Vs Sh. Laxmi Narayan and Ors. — Maintenance and Alimony | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~18

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(C) 1352/2020 & CM APPL. 4729/2020 MAMTA @ ANITA ..... Petitioner

¶4

Through: Ms. Arati Mahajan Shedha, Advocate versus SH. LAXMI NARAYAN AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Vivek Vidyarthi, Ms. Sarvagya Vidyarthi, Ms. Suvigya Vidyarthi, Ms. Prabhleen Kaur Gill and Mr. Shivam Bajpai, Advocates for R-2 Mr. Abhinav Singh and Mr. Praveen Kumar Kaushik, Advocate for R-3

¶5

CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN O R D E R % 20.05.2024

¶6

The respondents no. 1 and 2 (since respondent no.1 has already expired) filed an application in the office of the District Magistrate, North East vide diary bearing no. 4672 dated 17.10.2018 for invoking the jurisdiction under the relevant provisions of the Delhi Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules (Amendment) Rules, 2017 read with provisions of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.

¶7

The respondents no. 1 and 2 prayed for eviction of the petitioner from the property bearing House no. 91-B, Gali No.-04, Rama Garden, Karawal Nagar, New Delhi-110094.

¶8

The District Magistrate, North East, vide the impugned order dated 23.08.2019 in exercise of the powers conferred under the Delhi Maintenance

¶9

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/05/2024 at 13:03:15

¶10

and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules (Amendment) Rules, 2017 has directed the petitioner along with her minor kids to vacate the property in question bearing House no. 91-B, Gali No.-04, Rama Garden, Karawal Nagar, New Delhi-110094 and handover the vacant and peaceful possession to the respondents no. 1 and 2 within 30 days from the date of the impugned order. Being aggrieved, the petitioner filed the present petition.

¶11

Ms. Arati Mahajan Shedha, Advocate for the petitioner argued that the impugned order passed by the District Magistrate, North East was without any jurisdiction and as such the present writ petition is maintainable. 5. Mr. Vivek Vidyarthi, Advocate for the respondents no. 1 and 2 stated that the present writ petition is not maintainable as an alternate and appropriate remedy is available for the petitioner to file an appeal as per section 16 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.

¶12

Section 15 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 deals with the Constitution of the Appellate tribunal and section 16 of the Act deals with the appeal which provides that any senior citizen or a parent aggrieved by the order of the tribunal may within 60 days from the date of the order prefer an appeal to the Appellate tribunal in accordance with the procedure as laid down under section 16 itself.

¶13

The Appellate tribunal as constituted under section 15 provides for appeal as per section 16 of the Act as an alternate and efficacious remedy which is available to the petitioner.

¶14

The counsel for the petitioner in fairness stated that she be allowed to withdraw the present petition with the liberty to file an appeal before the appellate tribunal as per section 16 of the Act but till the disposal of the

¶15

¶16

appeal, the interim protection granted by this Court vide order dated 05.02.2020 be kept in operation.

¶17

Accordingly, the present petition on instructions of the petitioner is allowed to be dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty to the petitioner to file appropriate appeal before the Appellate tribunal as per section 16 of the abovementioned Act in accordance with law but not later than 45 days from today and thereafter the Appellate tribunal is directed to decide the appeal within 03 months in accordance with law.

¶18

The petitioner shall also be entitled to claim the benefit under section 14 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963.

¶19

It is also made clear that the interim order granted to the petitioner vide order dated 05.02.2022 shall remain enforced till the disposal of the appeal by the appellate authority.

¶20

DR. SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN, J

¶21

MAY 20, 2024 Sk/ak

¶22

This is a digitally signed order.

¶23

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/05/2024 at 13:03:16

Mamta @ Anita v. Sh. Laxmi Narayan and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mamta @ Anita v. Sh. Laxmi Narayan and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Umesh Kumar Vs Delhi Development Authority & Ors.

Sh. Mahesh Kapoor Vs Delhi State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation & Ors.

Nbcc (India) Ltd. Vs Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council / District Magistrate (West), Government of NCT of

Smt. Somarani and Anr. Vs Delhi State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. and Ors.

Chharia Impex Private Limited Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 6-1, Delhi & Anr.

Sharpi Agarwal Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 34(1), Delhi & Ors.

Naresh Mittal Vs Income Tax Officer Ward 43(6) Delhi & Ors.

Shalimar Fincap Private Limited Vs Income Tax Officer Ward 23 1 New Delhi & Anr.

Sh. Mahesh Kapoor Vs Delhi State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation & Ors.

Smt. Somarani and Anr. Vs Delhi State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. and Ors.

Amit Kohli Vs Directorate of Enforcement & Anr.

Sabana Saifi Vs Ministry of Telecommunication and Ors.

Mona Aggarwal & Ors. Vs UOI & Ors.

M/S Shri Bhagwan Hari Bhagwan Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.