The Bombay High Court has held in a recent judgment that the obligation of children to look after and maintain their parents under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, is an unconditional statutory duty and does not depend on whether the child is in possession of, or will inherit, the parent’s property. In this case, the court was considering a petition involving a 76-year-old woman, Mrs. Mohini Puri, who had been left in a precarious medical condition by her son after being abandoned in a hospital when she was admitted following a serious stroke.
Justices A. S. Gadkari and Ranjitsinha Raja Bhonsale presided over the petition filed by a hospital that had continued her treatment despite an unpaid bill of over ₹16 lakh. The court noted that her son had refused to pay the medical expenses or to take her home, even after being asked to by the court. The High Court expressed deep concern over what it described as a prima facie case of complete neglect and abandonment by the son, which, the court said, ran contrary to the purpose and intent of the Senior Citizens Act.
Invoking Sections 4 and 23 of the Act, the Court emphasized that a child’s duty to care for a parent is not merely moral or pious, but is explicitly prescribed by law. The court held that this duty “arises by birth” and is not contingent on property rights. Unlike the duty of a relative, which may be tied to inheritance or possession of the parent’s assets, a child’s statutory obligation to maintain a parent exists independently of such considerations. The Court rejected any argument that maintenance duty could be excused simply because the child stands to inherit from the parent, or does not already hold the parent’s property.
Moreover, the judgment underscored that neglect or abandonment of an elderly and medically fragile parent affects not just statutory rights, but also fundamental constitutional guarantees to dignity, health, and a meaningful life. The court lamented the failure of both the Maintenance Tribunal and the relevant authorities to act when the neglect was reported, noting that the inaction undermined the very object of the 2007 Act.
In addition, the High Court directed that if a senior citizen is under state or institutional care, protective mechanisms should be considered for their property. The Maintenance Tribunal, the court said, should weigh whether a protective order is needed to safeguard the senior citizen’s movable or immovable property during the period of state care. This, the Court noted, would help prevent exploitation or misuse of property when a parent is unable to manage it.
Thus, the court concluded that children’s duty to maintain their parents is an absolute statutory obligation, rooted in the law, and not dependent on any condition related to property inheritance or legal ownership.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.