Guwahati: The Gauhati High Court has set aside an eviction order directing a senior citizen’s son and daughter-in-law to vacate his residence, holding that maintenance tribunals must adhere to the principles of natural justice and follow the procedure prescribed under the law before ordering eviction.
Justice Mridul Kumar Kalita remanded the matter to the Maintenance Tribunal for fresh adjudication after finding that the tribunal had not allowed the petitioners to present evidence and had failed to comply with the statutory procedure under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, and the Assam State Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2012.
The case arose from an eviction order passed by the tribunal on January 29, directing the couple to vacate the senior citizen’s house within 30 days.
The senior citizen had alleged that his son and daughter-in-law subjected him to continuous harassment, intimidation and hostile behaviour, forcing him to leave his home and live in rented accommodation and hotels, thereby affecting his safety, dignity and mental well-being.
After his initial maintenance claim was rejected on the ground that he had sufficient means to maintain himself, the High Court, in July 2025, set aside that order and permitted him to file a fresh application under Section 5 of the 2007 Act.
He subsequently sought eviction of the couple, contending that their continued presence deprived him of the peaceful enjoyment of his residence. The tribunal allowed the plea, prompting the son and daughter-in-law to challenge the order before the High Court.
Appearing for the petitioners, senior advocate A.K. Bhuyan argued that although the tribunal’s order stated that the couple’s counsel had been heard, no such hearing had taken place before the eviction order was passed. He also contended that the tribunal had failed to comply with the procedure prescribed under the 2012 Rules.
While setting aside the eviction order, Justice Kalita observed that a maintenance tribunal is empowered to order eviction if it concludes that the continued presence of children or relatives prevents a senior citizen from peacefully enjoying his or her residence and compromises the person’s security and dignity.
However, the court held that such powers must be exercised only after following the procedure established under the Act and Rules.
The court also found serious procedural lapses in the tribunal’s handling of the case. It noted that the records produced before the High Court contained no index or order sheets and only included the final order dated January 29.
Justice Kalita observed that, as a quasi-judicial body, the tribunal is required to maintain proper order sheets and records to ensure transparency, accountability and judicial discipline, besides enabling appellate courts to effectively review the proceedings.
Holding that the tribunal had violated the principles of natural justice by denying the petitioners an opportunity to present evidence, the High Court set aside the eviction order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration in accordance with the Senior Citizens Act, 2007 and the Assam State Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules, 2012.