PRAKASH KRISHNA GAMARE AND ANR vs KRISHNA GANPAT GAMRE AND ANR

Judgment text excerpt

F-OJ-40-WP-5932-2024.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5932 OF 2024 Prakash Krishna Gamare & Anr …Petitioners Versus Krishna Ganpat Gamre & Anr …Respondents Mr. S.C. Mangle, a/w Tanmay M. Shembavanekar, for the Petitioners. Ms. Vijayalaxmi Obhan, i/b Pankaj Jadhav, for Respondents. CORAM : SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J. DATE : February 9, 2026 Oral Judgement: 1. Rule. Made returnable forthwith, and by consent of the parties, taken up for final hearing. Context and Factual Background: 2. The challenge in this Petition is to an order dated February 2, 2024 (“Impugned Order”) by which the Petitioners (“ the Sons”) have been directed, in exercise of powers under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (“ the Act”), to vacate the Digitally signed by ASHWINI ASHWINI JANARDAN JANARDAN VALLAKATI VALLAKATI Date: premises owned by their father, Respondent No. 1 (“ the Father”), which 2026.02.11 18:33:40 +0530 the Sons currently occupy in Liberty Garden in Malad, which is Page 1 of 24 February 9, 2026 F-OJ-40-WP-5932-2024.doc admittedly a slum unit. The Sons are offspring of the Father and his late first wife. Respondent No. 2 is the current wife of the Father. 3. I have heard Mr. Tanmay Shembavanekar, Learned Advocate on behalf of the Sons and Ms. Vijayalaxmi Obhan, Learned Advocate on behalf of the Respondents. With their assistance I have reviewed the material on record. Contentions of the Sons: 4. Mr. Shembavanekar on behalf of the Sons would submit that a plain reading of the Impugned Order indicates that the Maintenance Tribunal constituted under the Act has squarely held that the Father cannot be awarded maintenance. The Sons contend that the eligibility for grant of maintenance is a foundati