BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Reserved on : 14.06.2024 Pronounced on : 25.06.2024 CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR W.P.(MD)No.15951 of 2021 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.12885 and 12888 of 2021 S.Mohamed Bisel Khan ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Chairman, Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizen Tribunal and The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramanathapuram.

2. The Sub Registrar, Rajasingamangalam Sub Registrar Office, Ramanathapuram District.

3. S.Subuhani Begam ... Respondents Prayer : This Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the entire records connected with the order in Na.Ka.A4/7192/2020 dated

16.08.2021 passed by the first respondent and quash the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Saravanan For R1 : Mr.M.Prakash Additional Government Pleader For R2 : Mr.B.Saravanan Additional Government Pleader For R3 : No appearance

ORDER

The Writ Petition is directed against the order dated 16.08.2021 passed by the first respondent, declaring that the gift settlement deed dated 24.11.2016 as invalid and consequential direction issued to the second respondent to cancel the settlement document No.1630/2016.

2. Admittedly, the writ petitioner is the son of the third respondent.

3. The third respondent has executed a gift settlement deed dated

24.11.2016 vide document No.1630/2016 in favour of the writ petitioner in respect of the land measuring 1334 sq.feet comprised in Survey No.41/4 of Rajasingamangalam Village group, Ramanathapuram District. The third respondent has then submitted a petition before the District Collector, Ramanathapuram, who in turn forwarded the same to the first respondent. The first respondent, after getting reports from the District Social Welfare Officer, Village Administrative Officer of Petharthevankottai group, Rajasingamangalam Taluk and Tahsildar of Rajasingamangalam and on recording the statements of both the parties, has passed the impugned order dated 16.08.2021 holding that the gift settlement deed dated 24.11.2016 is invalid and directed the second respondent to cancel the said document. Aggrieved by the impugned order, the present writ petition came to be filed.

4. The case of the writ petitioner is that the writ petitioner was working abroad for a long number of years, that the writ petitioner purchased a land measuring 0.3.5 ares comprised in Survey No.34/1B2 of Petharthevankottai Village and constructed a house therein, that since the writ petitioner spent lot for the family, his mother-third respondent herein has settled the property now in dispute in favour of the writ petitioner, that the third respondent and her husband were with the writ petitioner till 2019 and he was taking care of their needs, that since the writ petitioner's parents suddenly developed misunderstanding with him, his wife and father-in-law, they left his home and started living separately, that the writ petitioner's parents have then started to lodge false complaints against him, his wife and father-in-law and that the third respondent has lodged a complaint before the District Collector on 14.09.2020 for cancelling the gift settlement deed and only on that basis, the impugned order came to be passed by the first respondent.

5. The stand taken by the third respondent is that the writ petitioner, after his marriage at the instigation of his wife and father-in-law, had created issues in the family and made his brothers to leave the family, that since the writ petitioner has refused to pay educational loan for the third respondent's fourth son, she has decided to give the land belonging to her to her other three sons, that the writ petitioner had threatened the third respondent and obtained a larger share, that thereafter the writ petitioner had sent the third respondent and her husband out of the home and that therefore the third respondent was constrained to lodge the complaint invoking the provisions of the Maintenance and Welfare o