The Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 does not apply retrospectively to settlement deeds executed before its enforcement.

ORDER :

SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI, C.J.

1. Questioning the legality and validity of the order dated 14.6.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge upholding the cancellation of settlement deed dated 28.1.2015 executed by the first respondent/father in favour of the appellant/son, the present appeal is filed.

2.1. Succinctly put, the facts run thus: The appellant is the son of the first respondent. The first respondent executed a settlement deed dated 23.6.2004 in favour of the appellant on his own volition. It is stated that the appellant paid a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- to his brothers towards relinquishment of their rights as per the instructions of the first respondent.

2.2. It is stated that, all of a sudden, the appellant received summons from the Civil Court pertaining to civil suit [O.S.No.3033 of 2016] filed by the first respondent seeking to declare the settlement deed dated 23.6.2004 as null and void and to declare the revocation of settlement deed dated 28.1.2015 executed by the first respondent as valid. The said suit was dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 20.10.2017 and the same was upheld on appeal by the III Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, vide judgment and decree dated 22.1.2019 passed in A.S.No.112 of 2018.

2.3. It is stated that thereafter the first respondent filed a complaint dated 21.10.2019 before the Revenue Divisional Officer. The said complaint was dismissed. The further appeal preferred by the first respondent, was dismissed by the second respondent/District Collector, vide order dated 27.4.2022.

2.4. Assailing the said order dated 27.4.2022 passed by the second respondent, the first respondent filed W.P.No.19363 of 2022 and the same was allowed vide order dated 14.6.2024 by setting aside the order passed by the second respondent and upholding the cancellation of settlement deed dated 28.1.2015. The appellant herein was directed to handover the vacant possession of the subject property to the first respondent forthwith. Hence, the present appeal.

3.1. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 came into force on 29.09.2008, whereas the settlement deed has been executed in favour of the appellant by the first respondent in the year 2004 and, therefore, the complaint filed by the first respondent before the statutory authority itself is not maintainable and the said vital fact was not considered by the learned Single Judge.

3.2. It is further submitted that the appellant paid Rs.1,50,000/- to his brothers for relinquishment of their rights as per the instructions of the first respondent and the settlement deed has been executed by the first respondent without any undue influence and coercion. He hastened to add that, after 11 years, the first respondent sought to cancel the settlement deed and the said challenge was repelled by the civil courts and, therefore, the learned Single Judge ought not to have allowed the claim of the first respondent.

3.3. It is also submitted that the first respondent is receiving around a sum of Rs.40,000/- towards monthly pension and has never approached the appellant seeking maintenance or shelter, but has all of a sudden sought to cancel the settlement deed with the sole intention of getting the possession of the property under the settlement deed. Such an attempt ought to have been thwarted by the learned Single Judge.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the first respondent reiterated the submissions made before the learned Single Judge and sought for dismissal of the appeal.

5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the order passed by the learned Single Judge.

6. At the outset, let us consider whether the provisions of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 are applicable to the settlement deed dated 23.6.2004.

7. To appreciate the aforesaid issue, it is apposite to refer to Section 23 of the Act, which reads thus:

"23. Transfer of property to be