As per case facts, the petitioners, who are the son and daughter-in-law of the opposite parties (senior citizens), challenged a Tribunal's order directing them to vacate a property and pay ... maintenance. The senior citizens had approached the Tribunal alleging physical assault, manhandling, and harassment by the petitioners, seeking their eviction from their residential premises. The petitioners appealed, arguing that the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act was inapplicable as no property was directly transferred by the senior citizens to them, and they claimed to reside in a dwelling house built on land acquired through a family settlement and later gifted to the daughter-in-law. The question arose whether the Tribunal, under this Act, possessed the jurisdiction to order eviction of children from a property, especially given the petitioners' claims of independent ownership, and if the property transfer requirement under the Act was met. Finally, the Court upheld the Tribunal's power, stating that the Act, as a welfare legislation, implicitly includes eviction powers to protect senior citizens' safety and property from errant children. It found that the petitioners' admission of receiving land through a family settlement involving the senior citizen satisfied the transfer requirement, dismissing the appeal and affirming the eviction and maintenance order due to the ongoing harassment and inadequate living conditions of the senior citizens.