IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
HARISANKAR V. MENON, J
VANEESH KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PALAKKAD – Respondent
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner has filed the captioned writ petition challenging Ext.P6 order issued by the 1st respondent, whereby Ext.P3 document executed by the petitioner’s father (2nd respondent) in his favour has been cancelled with reference to the provisions of Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (for short, ‘the Act’)
2. I have heard Sri. Rajesh Sivaramankutty, the learned counsel for the petitioner.
3. The only issue arising for consideration in this writ petition is as to whether an order in the nature of Ext.P6 can be issued under the provisions of Section 23 of the Act.
4. A reference to Ext.P3 document would show that when the same was executed on 03.12.2021, the 2nd respondent herein was only aged 55 years. This is also borne out of Ext.P4 – Aadhar card of the 2nd respondent, as per which he was born in the year 1966. Therefore, with reference to the provisions of Section 2 (h) of the Act, the 2nd respondent can be considered as senior citizen only when he attains the age of 60 years.
That being so, when the 2nd respondent filed the application before the 1st respondent and when the impugned order at Ext.P6 was issue
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.