08 March 2024 Marriage Law >> Family Law   |   Family Law >> Personal Law  

A recent court ruling clarified the division of maintenance payments for senior citizens under the Senior Citizens Act, 2007. The case involved two parents who sought maintenance from their three children and limits support per parent, not per child. Original split was unfair.

Facts:

• The Petitioners, Nikhil Koppikar and Nisha Koppikar, instituted Writ Petitions challenging an Order issued by the Maintenance Tribunal under the provisions of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (the Senior Citizens Act).
• The aforementioned Order directed the Petitioners, along with their sibling Sanjeev Koppikar, to provide maintenance to their parents, Nitin Krishana Koppikar and Nirmala Nitin Koppikar (the Respondents).
• The Maintenance Tribunal had ordered Nikhil and Sanjeev to pay Rs. 10,000/- each, while Nisha was directed to contribute Rs. 6,000/- towards the monthly maintenance of the Respondents.
• The Petitioners contested the Order, asserting that the Respondent-father possessed significant income and assets, rendering the maintenance order unnecessary.
• Additionally, they contended that the total amount directed by the Tribunal (Rs. 26,000/-) exceeded the statutory maximum permissible under Section 9(2) of the Senior Citizens Act, which capped maintenance at Rs. 10,000/- per month.

 

 

Conclusion:

• The Court upheld the principle of maintenance for the Respondents as mandated by the Tribunal. However, the Court modified the total amount awarded.
• The Court interpreted Section 9(2) of the Senior Citizens Act, holding that the maximum maintenance amount of Rs. 10,000/- applies to each individual senior citizen, not as a combined limit for all children contributing.
• Consequently, the total maintenance amount was reduced to Rs. 20,000/-, translating to Rs. 10,000/- per month for each Respondent. The Court further modified the apportionment of the Rs. 10,000/- maintenance burden amongst the Petitioners. Nikhil was directed to contribute Rs. 6,000/-, while Nisha's contribution was reduced to Rs. 4,000/- per month.