The obligation to maintain senior citizens can be inferred from circumstances, justifying cancellation of a gift deed when neglect and harassment are established.

Judgment :

Ramesh Sinha , CJ.

1. Heard Mr. Rajeev Shrivastava, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Mr. Akshat Tiwari and Ms. Sakshi Dewangan, learned counsel for the appellants. Also heard Mr. Priyank Rathi, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the State/ respondent No.1 and Mr. Vikrant Pillay, learned counsel, appearing for respondent Nos. 2 & 3.

2. By way of present writ appeal under Section 2 of Sub-Section (1) of the Chhattisgarh High Court (Appeal to Division Bench Act, 2006, the appellants, who were petitioners in the writ petition have challenged the order dated 20.01.2026 passed by learned Single Judge in WPC No. 87 of 2025 (Ramkishna Pandey & Another Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others), by which the writ petition filed by the writ petitioners/ appellants herein has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge.

3. Brief facts, necessary for disposal of this appeal, are that that the respondents No. 2 and 3 filed an application under Sections 5 and 23 of the 8 Act, 2007 (hereinafter ‘the Act, 2007’) before the Maintenance Tribunal - SDO(R) mainly contending that :-

(a) Petitioner No. 1 is the nephew of respondent No. 2, and petitioner No. 2 is the daughter of respondents No. 2 and 3. Respondents No. 2 out of love and affection for petitioner No. 1, executed a gift deed in his favour in respect of the land bearing Khasra No. 200/3, admeasuring 1250 sq. ft., situated at Village Koni, Kanchan Vihar, Bilaspur, on which a house has been constructed over 625 sq. ft. at the ground floor and 223 sq. ft. on the first floor (hereinafter referred to as ‘the disputed property’). The respondents had no son and only three daughters, and petitioner No. 1 being the only male member of the family and having taken care of them to their satisfaction, the gift deed was executed on 28.04.2016 in his favour.

(b) It was further the case of respondents No. 2 and 3 that petitioner No.1 had assured them that he would take care of them throughout their life. Respondent No. 2 being a retired employee and having no other shelter, continued to reside in the said property even after execution of the gift deed. Subsequently, petitioner No. 2, despite being married, left her matrimonial home and started residing in the said house along with petitioner No. 1, thereafter both the respondents were subjected to harassment and torture by the petitioners.

(c) It was also the case of respondents No. 2 and 3 that by alluring them, petitioner No. 1 has taken ATM of respondent No. 2 and withdrawn around Rs. 30 lakhs from the pension and GPF amount of deceased daughter of respondent No. 2, which on coming to their knowledge, they got the ATM blocked from the bank.

(d) It has been contended by respondents No. 2 and 3 that the petitioners have not only cheated them but also committed cruelty by threatening them to kill, and have also threatened them to forcibly evict from the house by throwing out their belongings. In this regard, a complaint was lodged at Police Station Koni on 29/04/2023, and reports were also submitted against petitioner No.1 to the Collector and the Superintendent of Police, Bilaspur for commission of offence under Sections 342, 420, 406, 424, 294, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. However, since no action was taken, his audacity has increased, and he has again started harassing them, even troubling them for basic necessities like food and water. It has been further contended that the respondents No.1 and 2 are octogenarian aged about 82 and 80 years respectively, and in Mar