IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 11.11.2025 Charanjit Kaur …Petitioner Versus The Presiding Officer, Appellate Tribunal cum Deputy Commissioner, Ferozepur and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Present: Mr. Harjinder Singh Dhillon, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Sahil R. Bakshi, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Raj Kumar Kakkar, Advocate for respondents No.3 (i) and 4.

Respondents No.3 (ii), 3 (iii), (a), (b), (c) and (d)

proceeded against exparte vide order dated 18.08.2025.

****

KULDEEP TIWARI, J.(ORAL)

1. The petitioner, who is daughter-in-law of respondent No.3 (since deceased), has approached this Court, by filing the instant writ petition, cast under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, to throw a challenge to the order dated 25.05.2022 (Annexure P-20), passed by the learned Appellate Tribunal-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Ferozepur (respondent No.1), as well as order dated 24.01.2019 (Annexure P-18), passed by the learned Tribunal-cum-Sub Divisional Magistrate, Zira, District Ferozepur, Punjab (respondent No.2), upon an application filed under Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizen Act, 2007 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the Act of 2007’), wherethrough, the transfer deed No.3828 dated 24.12.2012 (Annexure P-4), was ordered to be cancelled. The statutory appeal preferred by the petitioner before the learned Appellate Authority, was also dismissed vide order dated 25.05.2022 (Annexure P-20).

2. To begin with his lengthy arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner, while drawing the attention of this Court towards the contents of the transfer deed, submits that there is no recital in the said transfer deed, that such transfer was subject to the condition that the transferee shall provide the basic amenities and basic physical needs to the transferor. Therefore, the same cannot be cancelled, by invoking the provisions of Section 23 of the Act of 2007. Further, by narrating the sequence of events, he submits that the instant writ petition, has been filed at the behest of her husband (respondent No.4), in connivance with respondent No.3 (father-in-law, since deceased), in order to get rid of her. He submits that respondents No.3 and 4, wanted a son, to be born from the wedlock of the petitioner and respondent No.4 (husband), as a male heir, hence, they started pressurising the petitioner to perform a second marriage. Since, the petitioner was not agreeing for second marriage of respondent No.4, the atmosphere in the family remained tensed. In order to seek the consent of the petitioner, for allowing her husband to perform the second marriage, various proposals through the family Panchayat were given. Her husband also got transferred 07 acres of land, situated at village Markhai, Tehsil Zira, District Ferozepur, in the name of the petitioner, vide transfer deed No.377, dated 15.07.2017, and the said transfer formed the part of the land, which was earlier transferred by the respondent No.3, in the year 2012, in favour of his son, and in this transfer, the respondent No.3, stood himself as the attesting witness. Earlier, the respondent No.3, tried to eliminate the petitioner, under the garb of cleaning his licensed rifle, he shot at the petitioner, causing gun-shot injuries upon her legs. However, considering the relationship between them, on the very next day, the petitioner had entered into a compromise dated 07.09.2017, and respondent No.3, has regretted for the mistake and promised not to repeat the same in future. He submits that all these aspects have not been taken into consideration by the learned Tribunal concerned, at the time of passing the impugned order.

3. The learned Maintenance Tribunal concerned, after examining the contents of the transfer deed, allowed the application, and cancelled the transfer deed, vide order dated 24.01.2019 (Annexure P-18). The statutory appeal as preferred by the petitioner under the Act of 2007, was