Bombay High Court

Nitesh Shirish DhulapversusThe State of Maharashtra Through Government Pleader

Decided: 24 August 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The appeal is maintainable under Section 16 of the Act and the order of the Maintenance Tribunal is stayed for three weeks.

Summary

The petitioner, Nitesh Shirish Dhulap, sought relief from an order of the Maintenance Tribunal that directed his eviction, after the Appellate Tribunal declined to entertain his appeal. The petitioner argued that under Section 16 of the Maintenance of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, an appeal by a senior citizen’s relatives is maintainable before the Appellate Tribunal. The Court, relying on the Division Bench decision in Jagdish Pitambar Pawar v. Pitambar Pundalik Pawar (Writ Petition No.36 of 2023), held that such appeals are indeed maintainable. Consequently, the Court directed the Appellate Tribunal to hear the appeal if filed within eight days and to stay the execution of the Maintenance Tribunal’s order for three weeks. The petition was disposed with these directions.

Issues considered

Whether an appeal against an order of the Maintenance Tribunal is maintainable before the Appellate Tribunal under Section 16 of the Maintenance of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.
Whether a stay of the Maintenance Tribunal’s order is warranted pending the appeal.

Subjects

Maintenance Tribunal
Appellate Tribunal
Senior citizen
Section 16
Stay order
Writ petition
High Court of Bombay

Judgment

                                                                         __37-WP-10228-2026.DOC




                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                                      WRIT PETITION NO. 10228 OF 2026


                   Nitesh Shirish Dhulap                                         ..Petitioner

                           Versus

                   The State of Maharashtra Through Government              …Respondents
                   Pleader & Ors

                   Mr. Ghanshyam Dubey, i/b Mitesh Varshney, for the Petitioner.
                   Mr. A.C. Bhadang, AGP, for Respondent No.1-State.
                   Mr. Prasad N Thonse, for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3.

                                                 CORAM:         N. J. JAMADAR, J.
                                                 DATE :         24th AUGUST 2026
                   P.C.:

                   1.      Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

                   2.      The learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the
SAINATH
SANJAY             Petitioner has made an effort to file an Appeal before the Appellate
BODKHE
Digitally signed
by SAINATH
SANJAY BODKHE
Date: 2026.08.24
                   Tribunal against the impugned order passed by the Maintenance
20:17:45 +0530


                   Tribunal, directing eviction of the Petitioner. However, the Appellate

                   Tribunal has declined to entertain the Appeal.

                   3.      Mr. Bhadang, the learned AGP, on instructions, submits that all

                   the Appeals against the orders passed by the Maintenance Tribunal are

                   now being entertained by the Appellate Tribunal and in the event the


                   ARS                                    1/3
                                                       __37-WP-10228-2026.DOC

Petitioner files an Appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, the said Appeal

would be entertained and decided.

4.    In view of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the

case of Jagdish Pitambar Pawar Vs Pitambar Pundalik Pawar and Ors, 1

an appeal at the instance of the children and the relatives of a senior

citizen is maintainable before the Appellate Tribunal under Section 16

of the Act, 2007.

5.    The petition, thus, stands disposed with a direction to the

Appellate Tribunal to hear and decide the appeal which may be

preferred by the petitioner.

6.    In the event the Petitioner files an Appeal before the Appellate

Tribunal within a period of eight days from today, the Appellate

Tribunal is requested to hear and decide the Appeal as expeditiously as

possible, and if it is not possible to hear the Appeal finally, then hear the

Application for stay to the order of the Maintenance Tribunal, within a

period of two weeks, from the date of its institution.

7.    To facilitate the petitioner to file an Appeal before the Appellate

Tribunal alongwith an Application for stay to the execution and

operation of the order passed by the Maintenance Tribunal, the

execution and operation of the order passed by the Maintenance

Tribunal shall remain stayed for a period of three weeks from today.

1     Writ Petition No.36 of 2023, dated 29/11/2023.
ARS                                    2/3
                                        __37-WP-10228-2026.DOC

8.    Petition disposed.

                                 [N. J. JAMADAR, J.]




ARS                        3/3

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…