The provisions of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 override civil court jurisdiction, with appeals maintainable under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent when valuable rights are affected.

JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)

The respondent No.8 herein along with her husband, had executed a settlement deed dated 07.05.2018 in favour of the first appellant. Under this deed, a house property was transferred to the first appellant, who is the daughter of 8^th respondent and her husband. After the execution of the settlement deed, a deed of cancellation was registered by 8^th respondent and her husband on 07.12.2018 by way of a registered document.

2. The first appellant, had then filed O.S.No.84 of 2019 before the I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Nellore for grant of permanent injunction restraining the 8^th respondent and her husband from interfering with the possession of the first appellant over the property which had been settled on her. The first appellant had also filed Interlocutory Application No.27 of 2019 for temporary injunction pending the suit and the same was granted on 28.01.2019. The said temporary injunction is still subsisting.

3. The 8^th respondent, filed O.S.No.794 of 2021 in the Court of I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Nellore, for partition of property including the property which had been settled on the first appellant. All the three children of the 8^th respondent and the children of a pre-deceased daughter were arrayed as defendants in the suit. Subsequently, the 8^th defendant again filed O.S.No.83 of 2023 before the I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Nellore, seeking cancellation of the settlement deed (gift) dated 07.05.2018. This suit is also pending before the Court.

4. After initiating litigation before the civil Court, the 8^th respondent again moved the Revenue Divisional Officer, Nellore, the 4^th respondent herein, under the provisions of Maintenance and Welfare of parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). The complaint of the 8^th respondent was that the settlement deed dated 07.05.2018 falls foul of Section 23 of the Act and requires to be set aside. The Revenue Divisional Officer, the 4^th respondent, by an order, dated 15.03.2023, had set aside the gift settlement deed dated 07.05.2018 on the ground that there has been violation of Section 23 of the Act. Aggrieved by the same, the first appellant had moved the District Collector, the 3^rd respondent, by way of an appeal, under Section 16 of the Act. This appeal was dismissed, by the Collector, on 23.08.2024. A peculiar feature of this order was that the District Collector, had directed that possession of the property in question should be taken over by a non-governmental organisation as an interim protection.

5. Aggrieved by the said order, the Revenue Divisional Officer and the Collector, the appellants herein moved this Court by way of writ petition No.19789 of 2024. The appellants had also moved an interlocutory application for stay of eviction proceedings pursuant to the impugned orders.

6. A learned single Judge of this Court by an order dated 09.09.2024 had held that the Court was not inclined to grant interim orders to the petitioners as they are being evicted from the schedule premises.

7. Aggrieved by this order, the appellants have moved the present appeal.

8. Sri O.Manohar Reddy, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri Maganti Sai Krishna, learned counsel for the appellants contends that the provisions of the Act are not applicable in view of the fact that the conditions set out in Section 23 of the Act had not been met. He would further submit that though the order passed by the learned single Judge is an interim order, an appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent is maintainable. He relies upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SUDESH CHHIKARA Vs. RAMTI DEVI AND ANOTHER, [2022 SCC Online SC 1684] for his contention on the provisions of the Act and on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SHYAM SEL AND POWER LIMITED AND ANOTHER Vs. SHYAM STEEL INDUSTRIES LIMITED , [(2023) 1 SCC 634] on the question of maintainability of the appeal under Clause 15 of the Lett