The Bombay high court, while hearing a petition on Saturday, ruled that a son cannot have a right, title or interest in the flats owned by his parents till they are alive.

The petition was filed by a woman named Sonia Khan who was seeking to be declared as the legal guardian of all properties owned by her husband who had been living in a vegetative state for a long time.

The Bench of Justices Gautam Patel and Madhav Jamdar found that there was not even a single piece of document to show that the son had cared for his parents ever and he even lived somewhere else. The court found his submissions to be “ill-founded and illogical”. The bench reasoned that under the succession law for any community, there was no provision for a son to claim right or title to a property of the parent as long as they are alive.

Khan’s application claimed that his mother had ‘alternative remedy’ and hence no writ lied before the Court. However, the bench rejected his application while stating, “Asif has no rights in his father’s flats. He has nothing to show that he has ever cared for his father. We reject his contention that his mother has an ‘alternate remedy’. That submission alone shows us Asif’s true nature, his utterly heartless and avaricious approach. His Interim Application is dismissed.” the Bench held.

Meanwhile, on the wife’s application for guardianship, the Court noted that there was no specific provision which dealt with the issue of guardianship of a disabled person.

The bench, however, decided to deal with this specific case on the same footing as a minor who holds a share in immovable property. This implied that the husband in the present case was under the care and supervision of the court.

The bench permitted the wife to operate a bank account where she was joint holder. Further, upon specific query, the bench was informed that the wife wanted to sell the properties and use the money towards treatment of her husband.

the court asked her to begin the process of sale and negotiation of the property. Before executing any sale deed or memorandum of understanding, the wife was permitted to approach the Court with a separate application enlisting the details for the perusal of the court before deciding on granting leave.