SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Telangana) 2204

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
E.V.VENUGOPAL, J.
K. Srinivasa Reddy – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Revenue Department and others – Respondents
Writ Petition No.36422 of 2025
Decided On : 01-12-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Sri Pinni Venkata Adithya.
For the Respondents: M. Yadagiri, A.G.P., Sri M.Damodar Reddy, representing Ms. R. Bhavanarishi, learned counsel, Sri L.Ravinder, learned Assistant Govt. Pleader.

Transfer of property by senior citizens can only be annulled under specific conditions outlined in Section 23 of the Senior Citizens Act, and procedural compliance is essential for jurisdiction.

Headnote:(A) Senior Citizens Act, 2007 - Section 23 - Writ of Certiorari - Challenge to the cancellation of gift deed on grounds of non-fulfillment of maintenance conditions. Court found that conditions under Section 23 were not met, holding that the deed executed was out of love and affection without any ancillary conditions. The appellate authority lacked jurisdiction to cancel the deed under the Act. (Paras 11, 12, 13, 15)

(B) Jurisdiction - The authority for cancelling a gift deed must consider all procedural aspects, especially when an appeal is made under the Senior Citizens Act. The appellate authority's decision was found to lack proper jurisdiction and procedure as established by prior orders. (Paras 10, 14)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought to quash an order allowing the cancellation of a gift deed in favor of the petitioner, executed by his parent. The parent alleged lack of maintenance by the petitioner, invoking the Senior Citizens Act.

Findings of Court:
The cancellation of the gift deed was set aside, and the case was remanded for proper procedural compliance concerning the appeal.

Issues: Whether the requirements for invoking Section 23 of the Senior Citizens Act were met, and the jurisdiction of the authority to cancel the gift deed during the pendency of a partition suit.

Ratio Decidendi: The transfer conditions specified under Section 23 were not sufficiently proven to justify cancellation of the gift deed, and the appellate authority failed to follow due process in its adjudication.

Result: The impugned order was set aside and remanded back for reevaluation.

Table of Content
1. context of property dispute and allegations during litigation (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. details of the gift deed execution and contents (Para 7)
3. court's reasoning on applicability of section 23 (Para 8 , 12 , 13 , 14)
4. conditions for voiding property transfer under the senior citizens act (Para 9 , 10 , 11)
5. order for remand to original authority for reconsideration (Para 15 , 16)

ORDER :

E.V. VENUGOPAL, J.

This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief:-

“…to issue an appropriate writ or direction, more particularly in the nature of Writ of Certiorari by calling for the records relating to and in connection with the 2nd respondent’s order, dated 10.11.2025 in Case No.C/769/2024 and quash the same and/or pass such order...”

2. Heard Sri Pinni Venkata Adithya, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri M.Yadagiri, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Women Development and Child Welfare appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3; Sri M.Damodar Reddy, learned counsel representing Ms.R.Bhavanarishi, learned counsel for the caveators- respondent Nos.4 and 5 and Sri L.Ravinder, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent Nos.6 to 8 and with their consent, this writ petition is being taken up for disposal at the admission stage.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner, who is the son of respondent Nos.4 and 5, filed a suit for partition and separate possession against respondent Nos.4 and 5 and other children of respondent Nos.4 and 5 and also subsequent purchasers of part of the property, which is in dispute vide O.S.No.172 of 2022, pending on the file of the IX Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that, during pendency of the said suit, at the instance of other claimants to the property and to defeat the rights of the petitioner, respondent Nos.4 and 5 filed an application, dated 12.02.2024 before respondent No.2 under the provisions of the MAINTENANCE AND WELFARE OF PARENTS AND SENIOR CITIZENS ACT , 2007 (for short “the Senior Citizens Act”), seeking to cancel the Gift Settlement Deed bearing document No.213/2020 and to restore possession of the land admeasuring Acs.18.16 guntas in Sy.Nos.515, 26, 527, 573, 25 and 526/1, situated at Arrur Village, Valigonda Mandal, Yadadri-Bhongir District, as the petitioner failed to perform his part of obligation under the said document and not provided any maintenance to his parents as agreed by him. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that, when respondent No.2 did not consider the said application, respondent Nos.4 and 5 filed W.P.No.8148 of 2024. By an order, dated 28.03.2024, this Court disposed of the said writ petition directing respondent No.2 to consider and decide the aforesaid application strictly in accordance with law by putting the parties on notice and affording them an opportunity of hearing within sixty (60) days from the date of receipt of a copy of the said order. He would further submit that the said order is innocuous in nature, wherein this Court had specifically directed the said authority to pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law. Therefore, it can be inferred that this Court directed the said Authority to strictly follow the procedure under the Senior Citizens Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that, acting on the order passed by this Court, respondent No.2 had passed the impugned order in Case No.C.769/2024 and the operative portion of the impugned order is as under:-

“7. Though the partition suit filed by the respondent in O.S.No.172 of 2022 against the petitioners and his sisters before the Hon’ble IX Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad is pending adjudication shall not affect the present case.

In view of the circumstances stated above, the appeal is allowed and the powers vested under Section 23 of the Senior Citizens Act, the alleged Gift

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top