Senior Citizens Act | Maintenance Tribunal Has No Jurisdiction Over Complaints Not Seeking Maintenance Or Property Transfer: Patna High Court

The Patna High Court has ruled that the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 does not empower the Maintenance Tribunal to entertain complaints that do not seek maintenance or challenge a property transfer.

Justice Jitendra Kumar, presiding over the case, observed, “As per the statutory provisions of Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, it clearly transpires that the Act has been enacted to provide for effective provision for maintenance and welfare to parents and senior citizens granted and recognized under the constitution and for matters connected therewith and instituted thereto.”“The detail provision of the Act shows that parents and the senior citizens can seek for maintenance from the persons concerned who are liable under the Act or they can also get the transfer of any property made in favour of the person concerned declared void subject to fulfillment of the conditions but none of such relief has been sought for by the applicants,” Justice Kumar added.

The ruling was made in a criminal miscellaneous application whereby the petitioner sought to quash proceedings pending before the Maintenance Tribunal, Samastipur. The dispute arose when the petitioner's in-laws filed a complaint before the tribunal, alleging that the petitioner and his wife mistreated them, created a nuisance, and intimidated them on the petitioner's own land. However, they neither sought maintenance nor challenged any property transfer.

The petitioner argued that the tribunal lacked jurisdiction over such allegations, which, at most, constituted civil or criminal disputes. He contended that the tribunal was established under the 2007 Act for specific purposes—for providing maintenance to parents and senior citizens and getting any transfer of property declared to be void under certain circumstances, but no such relief was sought for by the applicants.

The petitioner further pointed out that the complainants had already initiated criminal proceedings by filing a written report at Mufassil Police Station, leading to the registration of an FIR.

The court in its judgement noted: “The alleged facts and circumstances of the case at most constitute a dispute of civil nature as well as criminal nature, and the applicants have their remedy under civil and criminal law and they have already invoked criminal law to file FIR.”

Consequently, the court quashed the proceedings before the Maintenance Tribunal, while directing the Patna High Court Legal Services Committee to pay an honorarium of ₹10,000 to the amicus curiae for assisting in the case.

Case Title: Ram Autar Rai vs The State Of Bihar and Ors

LL Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Pat) 10

Click Here To Download Judgement