The case involves an appeal concerning the cancellation of a gift deed transferring property from a mother to her son. The core issue is the interpretation of Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, particularly whether a transfer can be voided if the transferee fails to provide basic amenities and needs, even if a specific condition for maintenance is not explicitly stated in the deed. The Court discusses the beneficial nature of the Act, emphasizing that it should be interpreted liberally to protect senior citizens’ rights and ensure their well-being, ultimately overturning the High Court’s decision and restoring possession of the property to the mother.
(A) Maintenance and Welfare of the Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, Section 23 – Gift deed – Setting aside of – There are two documents on record – One, a promissory note dated 07.09.2019 which records that the promisor (Respondent) shall serve the Appellant and her husband till the end of their life, and in the absence of him fulfilling such obligation, the subsequent deed can be taken back by the Appellant – Second, the Gift Deed dated 07.09.2019 also records a similar condition, i.e. the donee maintains the donor, and the former makes all necessary provisions for the peaceful life of the Appellant-donor – Both these documents were signed simultaneously – Appellant has that such an undertaking stands grossly unfulfilled – It has been averred that there is a breakdown of peaceful relations inter se the parties –It cannot be said that the Tribunals constituted under the Act, while exercising jurisdiction under Section 23, cannot order possession to be transferred – This would defeat the purpose and object of the Act, which is to provide speedy, simple and inexpensive remedies for the elderly – Held that the Single Judge of the High Court and the tribunals below had rightly held the Gift Deed to be cancelled since the conditions for the well-being of the senior citizens were not complied with – Unable to agree with the view taken by the Division Bench, because it takes a strict view of a beneficial legislation – Impugned judgment liable to be set aside – Consequently, the Gift Deed dated 07.09.2019 liable to be quashed – Possession of the premises shall be restored to the Appellant by 28.02.2025.
(Para 23 to 26)
(B) Maintenance and Welfare of the Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, Section 23 – Interpretation of statute – Beneficial legislation – Held that the Act, 2007 is a beneficial piece of legislation, aimed at securing the rights of senior citizens, in view of the challenges faced by them – It is in this backdrop that the Act must be interpreted and a construction that advances the remedies of the Act must be adopted.
(Para 14)
Urmila Dixit V. Sunil Sharan Dixit
Supreme Court: 2025 INSC 20: (DoJ 02-01-2025)
