Senior Citizens Act Not A Tool To Evict Tenants; SDM Lacks Jurisdiction In Landlord-Tenant Disputes: Calcutta High Court
The Calcutta High Court has held that the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 cannot be invoked to evict a tenant in a landlord-tenant dispute, observing that such disputes must be adjudicated under the applicable tenancy laws before the competent civil court.
Justice Smita Das De quashed an order passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM), Siliguri directing a tenant to vacate the premises under Section 22 of the Senior Citizens Act, holding that the SDM had acted beyond the jurisdiction conferred by the statute.
The petitioner, a tenant under the opposite party, challenged an ex parte eviction order passed by the SDM in proceedings initiated by the landlady, who is a senior citizen. The landlady had alleged that the tenant was causing her mental disturbance and sought his eviction under Section 22 of the 2007 Act. The tenant contended that the original application was never served upon him and that the eviction order was passed without affording him an opportunity of hearing. He further argued that Section 22 of the Act could not be invoked in a landlord-tenant dispute and that eviction proceedings could only be initiated under the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 before the competent civil court.
Accepting the contention, the High Court observed that the Senior Citizens Act is a beneficial legislation enacted to ensure the maintenance and welfare of parents and senior citizens, with its scheme focusing on the obligation of children and relatives to maintain them. It held that the Act has no application to disputes arising between landlords and tenants.
The Court further held that while Section 22 empowers the District Magistrate to ensure protection of the life and property of senior citizens, it does not confer jurisdiction upon the Sub-Divisional Magistrate to adjudicate landlord-tenant disputes or pass orders of eviction against tenants. A tenant does not fall within the category of persons owing a legal or moral obligation to maintain a senior citizen.
Referring to the decisions in S. Vanitha v. Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District and Jitendra Gorakh Megh v. Additional Collector & Appellate Tribunal, the Court reiterated that the Senior Citizens Act cannot be used as a mechanism to bypass tenancy laws or secure eviction of tenants.
The Court also found merit in the petitioner's contention that the impugned order had been passed ex parte without service of notice, thereby raising concerns of violation of the principles of natural justice.
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the revisional application, quashed the SDM's eviction order, and granted liberty to the landlady to pursue appropriate eviction proceedings before the competent civil court in accordance with the provisions of the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997.
Case: Anna Sing @ Anan Singha VS Smt. Saswati Mallick
Case No: CO/111/2026