Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
C.T. RAVIKUMAR, SANJAY KAROL, JJ.
Urmila Dixit - Appellant
Versus
Sunil Sharan Dixit And Ors. - Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 10927 of 2024 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 720 of 2023)
Decided on : 02-01-2025
(A) Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 – Section 23 – Gift Deed – Cancellation of – Act of 2007 is a beneficial piece of legislation, aimed at securing rights of senior citizens, in view of challenges faced by them – It cannot be said that Tribunals constituted under the Act, while exercising jurisdiction under Section 23, cannot order possession to be transferred – This would defeat purpose and object of Act which is to provide speedy, simple and inexpensive remedies for elderly – Relief available to senior citizens under Section 23 is intrinsically linked with statement of objects and reasons of the Act, that elderly citizens of our country, in some cases, are not being looked after – It is directly in furtherance of objectives of Act and empowers senior citizens to secure their rights promptly when they transfer a property subject to the condition of being maintained by transferee – Single Judge of High Court and Tribunals below had rightly held Gift Deed to be cancelled since conditions for well-being of senior citizens were not complied with – Impugned judgment and order set aside and Gift Deed quashed – Possession of premises shall be restored to Appellant by 28.02.2025. (Paras 13, 14, 23, 24, 25 and 26)
(B) Interpretation of Statute – A beneficial legislation must receive a liberal construction in consonance with objectives that concerned Act seeks to serve – Interpretation of provisions of a beneficial legislation must be in line with a purposive construction, keeping in mind legislative purpose. (Paras 8 and 11)
Facts of the case:
Issue which arises for consideration of this Court is whether High Court was correct in setting aside order of Tribunal, granting benefit of Section 23 of Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, to Appellant?
Findings of Court:
Court is unable to agree with the view taken by the Division Bench, because it takes a strict view of a beneficial legislation.
Result : Appeal allowed.
No, under Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, the tribunal's jurisdiction to declare a property transfer void (and order possession restored) hinges on two strict essentials: (1) the transfer was made subject to an explicit condition that the transferee provide basic amenities and basic physical needs to the transferor; and (2) the transferee refused or failed to provide them. (!) (!) (!) If children can establish—through the transfer document itself or contemporaneous evidence—that no such condition was imposed (e.g., they were never asked or obligated to maintain), this first essential fails, barring relief under the provision. (!) (!) (!) Similarly, proof that the senior citizen's basic needs are already met (no refusal or failure) defeats the second essential, preventing the transfer from being deemed void. (!) (!)
While the Act is beneficial legislation warranting purposive interpretation to protect senior citizens' rights via speedy remedies, (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) tribunals cannot invoke Section 23 absent these preconditions, as doing so would exceed statutory limits. (!) (!) Eviction or possession orders are permissible only if tied to enforcing a valid Section 23 claim and necessary for the senior citizen's protection—not as standalone maintenance enforcement. (!) Thus, such proof could render eviction an overreach, justifying reversal on appeal. (!) (!)
JUDGMENT :
SANJAY KAROL J.
1. The present appeal arises from the final judgment and order dated 31.10.2022 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in Writ Appeal No. 1085 of 2022, whereby the judgment and order dated 02.08.2022 of the Single Judge of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in Writ Petition No. 11796 of 2022 was set aside.
2. The Single Judge of the High Court had, in turn, affirmed the judgment dated 25.04.2022 passed by the Collector, District Chhatarpur in Case No. 91/Appeal/2021-22 and the judgment dated 27.09.2021 passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate and Chairman, Chhatarpur in Case No. 98/B-121/2021-22, allowing the application filed by the Appellant herein under Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of the Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (hereinafter “the Act”) seeking setting aside of Gift Deed dated 09.09.2019.
Factual Matrix
3. The Appellant herein is the mother of the Respondent (son). The subject property was purchased by her on 23.01.1968. On 07.09.2019, the Appellant executed a Gift Deed in favour of the Respondent wherein it has been stated that the donee (Respondent) maintains the donor and makes provision for everything. This deed came to be registered on 09.09.2019. Allegedly, on the same day, a vachan patra/ promissory note is executed by the Respondent wherein it has been stated that he will take care of the Appellant till the end of her life and if he does not do so, the Appellant will be at liberty to take back the Gift Deed. The Respondent, before this Court, has alleged this vachan patra to be fabricated.
4. Thereafter, on 24.12.2020, the Appellant filed an application under Sections 22 and 23 of the Act before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Chhatarpur, alleging that she and her husband were attacked by the Respondent for further transfer of property and that the love and affection between the parties has completely ended. She prayed for setting aside the Gift Deed in question. This application came to be allowed, and the Gift Deed, transferring the property of the Appellant to the Respondent, was declared null and void. The Respondents preferred an appeal against this order, which came to be dismissed vide order dated 25.04.2022.
5. The Respondents, aggrieved, filed a Writ Petition bearing number 11796/2022 before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, at Jabalpur. The Single Judge affirmed the orders of the Courts below while observing that the Respondents had not approached the Court with clean hands and had failed to serve their parents who are senior citizen. The orders of the Courts below were held to be well-reasoned and in consonance with the Act.
6. A Writ Appeal was preferred thereafter, assailing the order of the Single Judge which has been allowed vide the impugned order. The Division Bench of the High Court, while setting aside the judgments of the Ld. Single Judge, vide the impugned order, made the following observations:-
6.1 Section 23 of the Act is a standalone provision, and the function of the Tribunal is only to find out whether the condition in the gift deed or otherwise contains a clause providing for basic amenities and whether the transferee has refused or failed to provide them. There is no other jurisdiction vested with the Tribunal.
6.2 No condition is there in the gift deed dated 09.09.2019 for maintenance of the transferor.
6.3 The argument relating to the affidavit dt. 07.09.2019, cannot be accepted.
If the intention of the parties was such, the gift deed should have had a clause to the same effect.
Issues for Consideration
7. We have heard Ms. V. Mohana, learned senior counsel for the Appellant, and Ms. Madhavi Divan, learned senior counsel appearing for the Respondents. We have also perused the written submissions filed by both sides. The issue which arises for consideration of this Court is whether the High Court was correct in setting aside the order of the Tribunal, granting benefit of Section 23 of the Act, to the Appellant?
(1) Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 is a beneficial piece of legislation, aimed at securing rights of senior citizens, in view of challenges faced by them – Tribunals....
Transfers made by senior citizens may be declared void under the Senior Citizens Act if they imply conditions of care and amenities, even if not explicitly stated in the document.
A gift deed can be declared void under Section 23 of the Act if implied conditions of care for the transferor are unmet, emphasizing the legislature's focus on the welfare of senior citizens.
The Senior Citizens Act allows annulment of property transfers if the transferee neglects to provide care, even without explicit conditions in the deed.
The love and affection between the parent and the child is an implied condition in the Settlement Deed and any violation of this condition would amount to fraud, coercion or undue influence, thus att....
The Senior Citizens Act mandates that children must ensure their parents lead a dignified life, and property transfers can be voided if basic amenities are not provided.
The existence of a condition for providing basic amenities to a senior citizen must be established for the Maintenance Tribunal to exercise jurisdiction under Section 23(1) of the Senior Citizens Act....
When a senior citizen parts with his or her property by executing a gift or a release or otherwise in favour of his or her near and dear ones, a condition of looking after the senior citizen is not n....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
