“20.The substance of Sub-section (2) of Section 23, as submitted by the Second and Third Respondents, is that the Tribunal had the jurisdiction to pass an order directing the eviction of the Appellant who is their daughter-in-law. According to the submission, the power to order eviction is implicit in the provision guaranteeing a 'right to receive maintenance out of an estate' and the enforcement of that right. In supporting the submission, they have referred to the view which has been taken by several High Courts, indicating that the Tribunal may order the eviction of a child or a relative from the property of a senior citizen, where there has been a breach of the obligation to maintain the senior citizen. The Tribunal under the Senior Citizens Act 2007 may have the authority to order an eviction, if it is necessary and expedient to ensure the maintenance and protection of the senior citizen or parent. Eviction, in other words would be an incident of the enforcement of the right to maintenance and protection. However, this remedy can be granted onlyafter adverting to the competing claims in the dispute. It is necessary to recapitulate that the situation in the present case is that the eviction was sought of the daughter-inlaw, i.e. the Appellant. The land, where the house has been constructed, was originally purchased by the son of the applicants who are seeking eviction of their daughter-in-law. The son had purchased the property a few months before his marriage to the Appellant. He had subsequently transferred the property by a registered sale deed to his father and the fact that it was for the same consideration after the
