“6. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners are senior citizen. It is stated that respondent no. 4 is the son and respondent no. 5 is daughter-in-law of the petitioners. It is stated that respondent no. 4 and 5 got married with each other as per Hindu Rites and ceremonies at Delhi. It is stated that respondent nos. 4 and 5 started residing at property No.C-1/194, Sultan Puri, Delhi-110086 since 2021 without the consent and permission of the petitioners. It is stated that initially the behaviour of the respondent no.4 and 5 was good towards the petitioners, but during the course of time, there was tremendous change in the behaviour of the respondent no.4 and 5. The respondent no.4 and 5 were immense disrespectful and even the respondent no.4 and 5 had inflicted immense cruelties on the petitioners, despite the fact that the petitioners are suffering from multiple ailments and they are under medical treatment. It is stated that petitioner no .l had purchased the above said property in the name of his wife i.e. petitioner no. 2 on 03.12.2020 for the survival of himself and his wife by the rental income in his old age,because the said property is built-up consisting of Ground Floor, First Floor and Second Floor. Further, respondent no. 4 and 5 had illegally, unlawfully and forcefully occupied the ground floor and second floor of the said property without any prior permission of the petitioners in the year 2021. It is stated that the respondent no.4 is living at the Ground floor of said property alongwith the respondent no.5 and the respondent no.4 and 5 had occupied with the household articles in the second floor. It is stated that respondent no.4 and 5 are treating the petitioners with all sorts of cruelties. It is pertinent to mention here that the respondent no.4 and 5 had also been using the abusive language against the petitioners with a sole motive to grab all the property of the petitioners. It is stated that petitioners had given a written complaint to the SHO concerned but did not help the petitioners and rather suggested them to file a case in a Senior Citizen Act.
