HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION No.33877 OF 2024

ORDER

Heard Sri Ravinder Samala, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt. G.Vijayakumari, learned Asst. Govt. Pleader for Women Development and Child Welfare Department, appearing for 1^st respondent, Mr. Shiv Shanker Tiwari, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3 and Mr. T.Vijay Hanuman Singh, learned counsel for respondent Nos.4 to 7.

2. Respondent No.3 filed application under Section 4 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Seniors Citizens Act, 2007 (for short, ‘the Act’) before 2^nd respondent to cancel the registered gift settlement deeds bearing document Nos.6087 and 6088 of 2012 both dated 23.04.2012 and also to pay maintenance in terms of order dated 29.01.2021 in I.A.No.1 of 2021 in A.S.No.1092 of 2016 of this Court.

3. Vide order dated 12.08.2024, 2^nd respondent allowed the said application and cancelled the said registered gift settlement deeds. He has directed the Sub Registrar, Joint Sub Registrar and Tahsildar, Nalgonda to cancel the said registered gift settlement deeds and mutate the name of 3^rd respondent in the revenue records in respect of the subject property.

4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said order, the petitioner herein has preferred an appeal vide Appeal No. At/021/2024 in terms of Section 16(1) of the Act before 1^st respondent. Vide order dated 25.11.2024, 1^st respondent dismissed the said appeal.

5. Challenging the said order, the petitioner filed the present writ petition contending that in the aforesaid registered gift settlement deeds executed by 3^rd respondent in favour of the petitioner, there is no condition that the petitioner shall provide basic amenities and basic physical needs to 3^rd respondent. Without considering the said aspects, 2^nd respondent passed the order dated 12.08.2024 confirmed by 1^st respondent vide order dated 25.11.2024.

6. The petitioner is the daughter of 3^rd respondent. 3^rd respondent who has filed a suit vide O.S.No.114 of 2012 against the petitioner and her husband for cancellation of the aforesaid gift settlement deeds both dated 23.04.2012. The said suit was dismissed on 26.09.2016. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said judgment and decree, 3^rd respondent preferred an appeal vide A.S.No.1092 of 2016. During pendency of the said appeal, both the petitioner, her husband and 3^rd respondent settled the disputes, entered into compromise. In terms of the said compromise, the said appeal was disposed of on 29.01.2021. The petitioner has agreed that she always expressed her willingness to take care of welfare of 3^rd respondent as agreed and it was specifically mentioned in the memorandum of settlement entered in A.S.No.1092 of 2016. Even then, 3^rd respondent filed the aforesaid application before 2^nd respondent seeking maintenance at the instance of respondents 5 to 7. 3^rd respondent has also executed registered gift settlement deeds in favour of respondent Nos.6 and 7 in respect of the land admeasuring Ac.11.00 guntas each and also extended other benefits to her daughters i.e. respondent Nos.4 and 5. The sons and respondent No.3 herein are residing at Nalgonda and she has not filed any complaint or case against the other sons and daughters for cancellation of such gift settlement deeds. She has filed a case only against the petitioner herein. 2^nd respondent did not consider the contention raised by the petitioner that she will deposit an amount of Rs.10,000/- per month to 3^rd respondent’s account and take care of her well being. She is willing to pay an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- towards her maintenance if she agrees. The said aspects were not considered by both 2^nd and 1^st respondents in the aforesaid orders. Therefore, the aforesaid order is in violation of the procedure laid down under the Act and principle laid down by the Apex Court in Sudesh Chhikara vs. Ramti Devi and another, (2022) 17 SCR 876. With the said submissions, the petitioner sought to set aside the aforesaid o