Senior Citizens Act tribunals can order eviction to protect parents, Supreme Court holds
A Bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and Alok Aradhe held that tribunals under the Senior Citizens Act can order eviction to secure a senior citizen’s maintenance and protection.
The Supreme Court has held that authorities under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 have the power to order the eviction of a family member from a senior citizen’s property when needed to ensure that citizen’s maintenance and protection. A Bench of Justices Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe set aside a judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, which had quashed eviction orders on the ground that the Act did not empower authorities to order eviction. The Court restored the eviction orders passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and affirmed by the District Magistrate. The decision confirms that eviction can be treated as an incident of enforcing a senior citizen’s right to maintenance and protection, aligning the statute with the constitutional commitment to protecting the vulnerable.
How the dispute reached the Court
The appellant, Ravi Kant Gupta, owns a residential house at No. 8/331, Vikas Nagar, Lucknow. His son is respondent no. 4 and his wife is respondent no. 5. The appellant’s mother, aged about 81 years, was forced to leave the premises and to reside at an old age facility.
On 5 June 2022, the appellant applied to the District Magistrate under the Act seeking eviction of his son from the premises.
By an order dated 15 November 2022, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate held that the premises was the self-acquired property of the appellant, that the son did not permit the grandmother to stay there, and that he had created nuisance. The SDM directed the son’s eviction.
The son and the wife appealed under Section 16 of the Act. On 9 August 2023, the District Magistrate affirmed the SDM’s order and directed them to hand over possession to the appellant.
The son and the wife then filed Writ-C No. 8139 of 2023 before the High Court. On 6 October 2023, the High Court quashed both orders and allowed the writ petition, holding that the Act did not empower the authorities to pass an order of eviction. The appellant’s review application was dismissed on 29 January 2024, with the High Court reiterating the lack of power to order eviction under the Act.
What the Court held on eviction power
The Court held that a tribunal under the Act has the power to order eviction to ensure the maintenance or protection of a senior citizen. It reasoned from the settled proposition that where an Act confers a jurisdiction, it impliedly grants the power to do all acts essentially necessary for its execution.
The Court pointed to the statutory scheme. Under Section 7, tribunals are constituted; under Section 8, they conduct an inquiry following a summary procedure with the powers of a Civil Court; and Section 27 bars the jurisdiction of the Civil Courts. On this analogy, the Court said it had “no hesitation” in holding that the tribunal can order eviction.
The precedent relied upon
The Court noted that a three-Judge Bench in S. Vanitha v. Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District (2021) 15 SCC 730, dealing with claims under the Act and the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, held that the tribunal may have authority to order eviction if necessary and expedient to ensure the maintenance and protection of a senior citizen or parent. Eviction, it was held, would be an incident of enforcing the right to maintenance and protection.
Following that view, a two-Judge Bench in Samtola Devi v. State of U.P., 2025 SCC OnLine SC 669, held that the tribunal may order eviction if necessary and expedient to protect senior citizens. Another two-Judge Bench in Kamalakant Mishra v. Additional Collector, 2025 SCC OnLine 2077, reiterated the same view.
The Court expressed respectful agreement with these decisions and held that the High Court’s reliance on its own decision in Abhishek Tiwari and Another v. State of U.P., 2022 SCC OnLine All 367, was misconceived.
Constitutional framing
The Court framed the Act against Article 21 and Article 41 of the Constitution, describing a social order that protects the vulnerable and enables every individual to live with dignity. It observed that the Act gives statutory expression to this commitment and is intended to provide a speedy remedy for the senior citizen.
Order
Delay was condoned and leave was granted. The Court set aside the High Court judgment dated 6 October 2023 in Writ-C No. 8139 of 2023 and the order dated 29 January 2024 in Civil Misc. Review Application No. 128 of 2023, and restored the eviction orders passed by the authorities under the Act.
The appeals were allowed with no order as to costs.