Legal Reference Library

Madurai Bench of High Court of Madras, in Thilagavathi v. Deputy Commissioner of Labour and Ors., has upheld an order awarding a part of compensation paid for the death of an industrial worker to the parents of the deceased. Justice S. Vaidyanathan observed, “The respondent has clearly stated that since the children of the deceased have completed 18 years of age and attained majority, there is a bar under the provisions of the Act to treat them as dependants of the deceased employee.Moreover, this Court finds nothing wrong in adding the parents of the deceased as dependants, as it was rightly contended by the 1st respondent that under Section 2(1) (d)(iii)(b) of the Act, it has been mentioned as “a parent other than a widowed mother. The case related to the death of one Subramaniyan who, while working as machine operator at Sakthi Sugar Mills in Sivagangai, died due to injuries suffered in the course of employment. Based on a claim petition filed under Section 22 of the Workmen Com...

The Kerala High Court in Mavila Sathi vs. State of Kerala and Ors has held that the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (the ‘Act’), cannot be allowed to be used as a tool in property disputes. Petitioner Mavila Sathi had filed the writ petition against the direction issued by the Maintenance Tribunal, according to which she had to reconvey 10 cents of property given to her by her mother Devaki Amma after having assigned 23 cents previously, along with the direction of paying a monthly maintenance of Rs 500 per month. However, Mavila’s brother Govindan took away their mother to stay with him, as she had allegedly ousted her from her house and had refused to look after her. Mavila was assigned 23 cents of property retaining Devaki’s right to take the benefits and right of residence in the tharawad building situated in the property, according to her brother’s contentions. Govindan alleged that though the petitioner was assigned 41 cents of property on conditi...

In a judgment that will shield parents against unruly and unsupportive children, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has given a new meaning to their relationship. The High Court has asserted that a son is a mere licensee putting up on the premises owned by his father. The District Magistrate is competent to order his eviction. The judgment by Justice Hemant Gupta and Justice Sneh Prashar came on a petition by Gurpreet Singh against his father and other respondents. The Bench said: “The petitioner is a licensee living on the premises on the basis of concession given by his father to live in the property owned by him. As a licensee, the petitioner is only permitted to enjoy the possession of the property licensed, but without creating any interest in the property. A licence stands terminated the moment the licensor conveys a notice of termination of the licence. There is no vested right of any kind in the licensee to remain in possession of the property licensed,” it said. Arti...