(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for records pertaining to Order bearing Na.Ka.No.CLRREV/13620/2025/VU2 dt. 14.11.2025 on the file of the 1st Respondent and to quash the same insofar as it relating to the Order of maintenance only for a sum of Rs.14,000/- p.m. (to petitioner and petitioner’s husband Maruthachalam) instead of sum of Rs.30,000/- p.m. and to quash the same and consequently to direct the Respondents -3 and 4 to pay a sum of Rs.30,000/- p.m. to petitioner and petitioner’s husband to provide /arrange, residence for us and to cancel the Settlement Deed dt. 23.03.2020 (bearing Document No.2053/2020) executed by petitioner and petitioner’s husband Maruthachalam in favour of the 4th Respondent)

1. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 14.11.2025 passed by the first respondent insofar as it grants only ₹14,000/- per month as maintenance instead of ₹30,000/-, declines the relief of residential accommodation, and refuses to cancel the settlement deed dated 23.03.2020.

2. The petitioner is the mother-in-law of the third respondent, the paternal grandmother of the fourth respondent and the mother of the fifth respondent.

3. During their lifetime, the petitioner and her husband executed a settlement deed in favour of their son in respect of the subject property. After the death of their son in 2018, his one-fourth share devolved upon the petitioner and her husband. Thereafter, out of love and affection, they settled their respective shares in favour of their minor granddaughter, the fourth respondent, under a settlement deed dated 23.03.2020. According to the petitioner, the settlement was made on the understanding that the fourth respondent would provide them with maintenance, basic amenities and physical needs. Since the fourth respondent failed to do so, and the third respondent also neglected to maintain them, the petitioner approached the second respondent seeking cancellation of the settlement deed and grant of maintenance.

4. The second respondent directed respondents 3 and 4 to pay ₹3,000/- each per month towards the maintenance of the petitioner and her husband. The fifth respondent was directed to pay ₹4,000/- towards their medical expenses. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal under Section 16 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. The first respondent, by the impugned order, enhanced the total maintenance to ₹14,000/- per month.

5. Heard the learned counsel appearing on both sides.

6. Respondents 3 and 4 have filed a counter affidavit stating that they are paying ₹7,000/- each per month towards the maintenance of the petitioner and her husband. They have also undertaken to provide residential accommodation by bearing the monthly rent payable to the landlord.

7. The petitioner submits that she has no independent source of income and that the maintenance of ₹14,000/- per month is inadequate. It is also submitted that although the fifth respondent is meeting the medical expenses, the amount awarded towards maintenance requires enhancement.

8. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner and her husband conveyed their valuable property to the fourth respondent out of love and affection, and considering their age and financial needs, this Court is of the view that the monthly maintenance deserves to be enhanced from ₹14,000/- to ₹20,000/-.

9. Accordingly, the writ petition is partly allowed. The impugned order dated 14.11.2025 is modified to the extent that respondents 3 and 4 shall jointly pay a sum of ₹20,000/- per month as maintenance to the petitioner and her husband with effect from 01.09.2026. The monthly maintenance shall be paid on or before the 7th day of every succeeding month. The arrears, if any, shall be paid within four weeks from today, i.e., on or before 24.08.2026.

10. In all other respects, the impugned order passed by the first respondent is affirmed, and respondents 3 and 4 shall comply with its remaining directions. There shall be no order as to costs.