The Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 does not apply to transactions before its enactment, requiring express conditions for nullifying gifts based on lack of maintenance.

ORDER :

(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ, J.)

1. The Petitioner- Senior Citizen in WP No.4280/2024 is before this Court seeking the following reliefs :

a. Issue a writ of certiorari, setting aside the impugned order pertaining to the direction to R2 and R3 to accommodate petitioner in the subject property i.e., schedule property No.2, within 30 days from the date of the order passed by the respondent no.1 on 29.01.2020, in Misc.Cr.106/2018-19 vide Annexure- E.

b. Issue a writ of mandamus directing the R2 and 3 to hand over/ give possession of the subject property i.e., schedule property No.2 to the petitioner with immediate effect.

c. Pass such other orders as may be appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the ends of justice and equity.

2. The Petitioners in WP No.11886/2021 are before this Court seeking the following reliefs :

d. Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the order dated 29.01.2020 in proceedings No. MSC.CR.106/2018-19 passed by the R1 vide Annexure-D

e. Pass such other orders as may be appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the ends of justice and equity.

3. Facts in WP No.4280 of 2024 :

3.1. Petitioner No.1 in WP No.11886 of 2021 is the Son of Respondent No.2-therein, who is none other than the Petitioner in WP No.4280 of 2024. It is not in dispute that the Petitioner in WP No.4280 of 2024 Smt.Krishnaveni (hereinafter referred to as “Mother”) is the owner of Municipal Corporation bearing No.988 situated at Hosur-Sarjapura Road layout, Sector-7, Bengaluru (herein after referred to as “HSR property”) measuring East to West 9.14 metres and North to South 12.19 metres which is allotted to her by the BDA and a sale deed executed in her favour on 07.06.2001. Mother is also stated to be the founder and promoter of Gayathri Educational Institution and Universal Education Institutions, running several colleges and schools. The said institutions were being run by Mother until respondents No.2 and 3, i.e., her Son and daughter-in-law, became the directors of the said Trust.

3.2. Respondent No.2 is the Son of the Mother (hereinafter referred to as “Son”), Respondent No.2 is the Daughter-In-Law of the Mother (hereinafter referred to as “Daughter- in-law”). Apart from Respondent No.2-son, Mother does not have any other children. After their marriage, Son and Daughter-in-law are stated to be living separately in Chikkaballapura. However, since they expressed financial difficulties, they were made directors of the aforesaid society and were given the post of Joint Secretary and Vice President of the Society. Mother claims that in the year 2016, they pleaded with her and sought permission to live with her, till they made alternate arrangements in Bangalore and as such they were accommodated in her home bearing No.149, Karnataka layout, 1^st Cross, West of Chord Road, 2^nd Stage, Mahalakshmipuram, Bangalore-560 086 (herein after referred to as “Mahalakshmipuram Property”).

3.3. The Mahalakshmipuram property is stated to be purchased by the Mother under a sale dated 02.12.1992, which is also not in dispute. The Mother claims that the Son and daughter-in-law taking undue advantage of her advanced age promised that they will look after her and got the petitioner to execute a gift deed in respect of the HSR property in the name of the Son, wherein they had stated that they would be putting up of a construction of a house. It is in pursuance thereo