Rakesh Kumar Jain, J. - (1.) The petitioner has challenged the order dated 24.11.2014 passed by the Welfare Tribunal, Panchkula, dismissing her application filed under Section 23(1) of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") and order dated 24.03.2015 passed by the Appellate Tribunal-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Panchkula, dismissing her appeal.
(2.) In brief, the petitioner is a widowed senior citizen. She filed an application under Section 23(1) of the Act against her son and daughter-inlaw seeking their eviction from the portion, in their occupation, of House No.225, Sector-6, Panchkula. Her application filed under Section 23(1) has been dismissed, inter alia, on the ground that it was not found maintainable because the petitioner has not transferred the property in question in the name of the private respondents.
(3.) Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner can maintain the application under Section 23(1) of the Act and has basically relied upon the word "or otherwise", used in that provision, to contend that the petitioner can seek eviction for recovering possession and has relied upon a decision of this Court rendered in the case of Promil Tomar and others v. State of Haryana and others, 2014(1) RCR (Civil) 403 .;