MP High Court: Children Cannot Lightly Restrain Elderly Parents From Enjoying Property

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that children cannot casually seek court orders preventing elderly parents from enjoying or alienating their property, especially without a strong prima facie case establishing coparcenary rights. In Mukesh Kumar Kewat v. Gaya Prasad Kewat, Justice Vivek Jain observed that restraining senior citizens from dealing with their assets in old age would amount to a “travesty of justice” and denial of their “basic human rights in the evening of their life.”

The dispute arose from a partition suit filed by a son claiming ancestral rights over properties standing in his 90-year-old father’s name. While the trial court had restrained alienation of four properties, the appellate court later lifted the injunction for two properties after finding no prima facie proof that they were coparcenary assets.

Upholding the appellate court’s reasoning, the High Court stressed that mere allegations of birthright are insufficient to restrict a parent’s control over property. Relying on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Yudhishter v. Ashok Kumar, the court reiterated that after the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, inherited property does not automatically become coparcenary property. Since one disputed property had been acquired in 1961 and another lacked a proven ancestral source, no strong prima facie case existed. The petitions were accordingly dismissed.