JUDGMENT : A. Pasayat, J. - "Life can be bitter to the very bone, when one is poor, and woman and alone" said John Massfield in "The Widow in the Bye Street." The septuagenarian Petitioner lost her son Bhagyadhar Misra who was working as a Peon in Salipur High School in October, 1988. She asserts that her daughter-in-law, the opp. party No. 1 is bound to maintain her, because she is recipient of all benefits that were made available to the family, after the death of Bhagyadhar. The undisputed position is that the opp. party No. 1 is employed as a Staff Nurse in the Sub-Divisional Hospital, Kendrapara and is in employment since November, 1981. Family pension is being paid to her. It is true the liability of the heirs is not personal but is limited to the estate if any left by the deceased and such estate must have also been inherited by the heirs. But the expression "estate" has to be widely construed. We do not propose to delve into the ticklish question whether any estate was inherited by the opp. party No. 1. 2. A counter affidavit has been filed by the opp. party No. 1, primarily taking the stand that she is not in law, required to maintain her mother-in-law. It is also asserted that the Petitioner has another son who is serving in Cuttack Municipality, and the Petitioner can very well stay with the other son. 3. We feel that human considerations are writ large in this case. The question is whether the daughter-in-law is under any obligations, be it under law or out of compassions or on humanitarian grounds required to maintain the mother-in-law. At this juncture, it is relevant to take note of some of the provisions of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (in short, the 'Act'). Section 20 provides that a Hindu is bound, during his or her life time, to maintain his or her aged or infirm parents. Sub-section (3) however stipulates that the obligation exists only if they are unable to maintain themselves out of their own earnings or other property. Section 21 defines dependants for the purpose of Chapter-III of the Act and includes the mother of the deceased. The said section is linked with Section 22 which gives the right to certain persons as dependants they are u/s 21. Section 21 defines dependants for the purpose of Chapter-III of the Act and includes the mother of the deceased. The said section is linked with Section 22 which gives the right to certain persons as dependants they are u/s 21. u/s 21 (1), the heir of a deceased Hindu are bound to the maintain the Defendants of the deceased our of the estate inherited by them from the deceased. 4. Undisputedly, family pension is being received by the opp. party No. 1. The same is intended for the benefit of all the members of the deceased's family, obviously including the Petitioner. The opp. party No. 1 should not hide behind screens of technicalities to deny her obligations to look after the welfare of the aged, poor mother-in-law. For her, life is ''a crust of bread and a corner to sleep in, a minute to smile and an hour to weep in" as Paul Laurence Dunbar in "Life." For her, "Life is made up of sobs, sniffles, and smiles with sniffles predominating" (per O. Henry in 'Gift of the Magi"). After marriage, the opp. party No. 1 became Petitioner's daugther "in law". From her parental house she came to the' family of her husband of which Petitioner is an important member. They shared the joys and sorrows together. Shall that bond of relationship, love, affection be permitted to be snapped on hyper-technical premises? The answer is an emphatic "no." 5. In these circumstances, we direct that whatever amount is received by the opp. party No. 1 as family pension be handed over to the Petitioner every month so long she is alive. Payment shall be made from September, 1993. While giving this direction, we have taken note of the income of opp. party No. The writ application is accordingly disposed of. D.M. Patnaik, J. 6. I agree.