Gauhati HC sets aside eviction of son, daughter-in-law from senior citizen's home, orders fresh hearing

The Gauhati High Court has set aside an eviction order directing a son and his wife to vacate the house of a senior citizen, holding that eviction proceedings under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, must strictly adhere to the principles of natural justice.

Justice Mridul Kumar Kalita passed the order while hearing a petition filed by the son and daughter-in-law challenging the eviction order issued by a Maintenance Tribunal. The court remanded the matter to the tribunal for a fresh hearing after finding that it had failed to follow the prescribed statutory procedure and did not provide the petitioners an opportunity to present evidence.

The court, however, clarified that a Maintenance Tribunal has the authority to order the eviction of children or relatives if it concludes that their continued presence prevents a senior citizen from peacefully enjoying his or her residence and compromises the person's security and dignity.

"The Maintenance Tribunal can even pass an order of eviction against the opposite parties" if it finds that the senior citizen is unable to peacefully enjoy his residence due to their presence, the court observed.

The dispute arose after the elderly father alleged that his son and daughter-in-law subjected him to continuous harassment, intimidation and hostile behaviour, forcing him to leave his own house and stay in rented accommodation and hotels, thereby affecting his safety, dignity and mental well-being.

His initial maintenance application was rejected by the tribunal on the ground that he had sufficient means to maintain himself. The Gauhati High Court later set aside that order in July 2025 and allowed him to file a fresh application under Section 5 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act.

Acting on the fresh plea, the tribunal directed the son and daughter-in-law on January 29 to vacate the residential property within 30 days, prompting them to move the High Court.

Before the High Court, senior advocate A.K. Bhuyan, appearing for the petitioners, argued that although the tribunal's order stated that the couple's counsel had been heard, no such hearing had actually taken place. He also contended that the tribunal failed to comply with the Assam State Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2012.

While examining the case records, the High Court found serious procedural lapses. It noted that the tribunal had failed to maintain proper records, including an index and day-to-day order sheets, with only the final eviction order available on record.

Justice Kalita observed that as a quasi-judicial body, the Maintenance Tribunal is bound to follow the principles of natural justice and maintain proper judicial records to ensure transparency, accountability and judicial discipline.

Holding that the petitioners were denied a fair opportunity to contest the proceedings, the High Court set aside the eviction order and remanded the matter to the tribunal for fresh adjudication in accordance with the provisions of the 2007 Act and the Assam State Rules, after giving all parties an adequate opportunity to be heard.