The specific provisions of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, particularly Section 23, can override the general law under the Transfer of Property Act, and can be used to declare a transfer void if the transferee fails to provide basic amenities and physical needs to the transferor.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: This Second Appeal is filed under Section 100 of the C.P.C, against the judgement and decree of the Court of the learned III Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai in A.S.No.172 of 2018 dated 15.02.2018 dismissing the appeal and reversing the judgement and decree dated 28.06.2017 passed in O.S.No.6570 of 2014 by the learned VIII Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai.)

1. Saint Thiruvalluvar, the Great Tamil Poet had epitomized the role of a son in a couplet as follows:-

Translated the same means that "where a son conducts himself insuch a manner that people around would praise the father and state that the father must have undergone great penance to have begotten such a son."

The above words echoes the ethos of our society. The case on hand demonstrates how these values are fast loosing its significance.

The words of Justice V.R.Krishna Iyer in his Judgement reported in AIR 1980 SC 2181 - The Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs. D.J.Bahadur and Others "Judicial acceptance of social dynamics as protected by the Constitution is the crucial factor in this case" sets the tone for the instant case.

2. The unfortunate parents are the appellants before this Court. The challenge in this Second Appeal is to the Judgment and Decree in A.S.No.172 of 2018 on the file of the III Additional City Civil Court, Chennai in and by which the learned Judge has reversed the Judgement and Decree of the Trial Court. It is necessary to allude to the facts which has culminated in the filing of the above Second Appeal and for ease of understanding the parties are referred to in their same litigative status as before the Trial Court.

Plaintiff’s Case

3. The plaintiff who is the eldest son of the defendants had filed the suit O.S.No.6570 of 2014 on the file of the VIII Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai for a declaration that the deed of cancellation of settlement deed dated 27.03.2014 in Document No.1475 of 2014 on the file of the Sub-Registrar, Konur is null and void and not binding on the plaintiff and also for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their men or agents or anybody claiming under them from in any manner interfering with the right, title, interest and possession of the plaintiff. In and by the above deed the settlement deed dated 23.01.2012 registered as Document No.256 of 2012 on the file of the very same Sub-Registrar was cancelled.

4. It is his case that he was taking care of his parents as he was comfortably well of and living abroad. The defendants have executed a registered settlement deed dated 23.01.2012 under Document No.256 of 2012 registered with the SRO, Konur. Under this deed they had settled the suit property absolutely in favour of the plaintiff free of all encumbrances retaining only a life interest therein after delivering possession of the suit property to the plaintiff. Though possession was delivered to the plaintiff, the defendants were enjoying the property pursuant to the life interest contained therein.

5. While so, the plaintiff came to learn that the defendants had executed a deed dated 27.03.2014 which was in the nature of a cancellation deed in and by which the settlement deed dated 23.01.2012 was cancelled. The plaintiff would submit that after delivering possession and transferring the suit property to the plaintiff and having accepted and acted upon the said settlement deed dated 23.01.2012 by enjoying their life interest, the defendants are completely devoid of any right, title or interest over the suit property except for their life interest. The cancellation of the settlement deed would at best only mean that the defendants have relinquished their life interest in the property. It is also the case of the plaintiff that taking advantage of the cancellation deed, the defendants were attempting to dispose of the suit property. Therefore, the present suit.

Written Statement of the Defendants-

6. The defendants had denied the contents of the plaint. It is their case that the sui