JUDGMENT

Rakesh Kumar Jain, J. (Oral) - The question involved in this case is as to whether an application filed by a senior citizen under section 22 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') read with Rules and the action plan would be maintainable in case the said senior citizen transfers the title of the property to someone else during the pendency of the application?

2. Brief facts of this case are that the petitioner, being a senior citizen and mother of private respondents, filed an application under Section 22 of the Act before the District Magistrate, Ambala for seeking eviction of private respondents from the property in dispute i.e. House No. 575/2, Chanana Colony, Naraingarh, District Amabala. She made allegations against her son-respondent No. 1 that he is a drunkard, also assaulted her with iron-rod and other members of his family and also misbehaved with her.

3. The complaint made by the petitioner was dismissed by the District Magistrate vide order dated 30.01.2018 on the ground that the petitioner ceased to be the owner of the property because she had transferred the said property vide registered transfer deed No. 2954 dated 22.03.2017 to respondents No. 10 and 11 before the final decision of the application filed under Section 22 of the Act.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned order is illegal because the property is defined under Section 2 (f) of the Act which means "property of any kind, whether movable or immovable, ancestral or self acquired, tangible or intangible and includes rights or interests in such property." It is submitted that even if she is no more owner of the property in question, she would be a licensee of the said property under section 52 of the Indian Easements Act, 1882 and in this regard has referred to Section 23 of the Act to contend that if the petitioner may not be owner of the property than she would the licensee in view of the word used in the sub-section as gift or "otherwise".

5. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record with his able assistance.

6. Chapter V of the Act deals with "Protection of Life and Property of Senior Citizen" in which Section 22 provides that "the State Government to confer such powers and impose such duties on a District Magistrate as may be necessary, to ensure that the provisions of this Act are properly carried out and the District Magistrate may specify the officer, subordinate to him, who shall exercise all or any of the powers, and perform all or any of the duties, so conferred or imposed and the local limits within which such powers or duties shall be carried out by the officer as may be prescribed."

Section 22 (2) further provides that "the State Government shall prescribe a comprehensive action plan for providing protection of life and property of senior citizens."

7. Section 23 deals with the transfer of property to be declared as void in certain circumstances in which it is provided that "a senior citizen who, after the commencement of this Act, has transferred by way of gift or otherwise, his property, subject to the condition that the transferee shall provide the basic amenities and basic physical needs to the transferor and such transferee refuses or fails to provide such amenities and physical needs, the said transfer of property shall be deemed to have been made by fraud or coercion or under undue influence and shall at the option of the transferor be declared void by the Tribunal."

8. The Tribunal is defined under Section 2 (j) which means Maintenance Tribunal constituted under Section 7.

9. Since, Section 22 (2) provides that the State Government shall prescribe a comprehensive action plan for providing protection of life and property of senior citizens, therefore, in terms of Rules 24 of the Haryana Maintenance of Parents and Senior Citizen Rules, 2009, the Action Plan was provided. The said Rule reads under: