Madras High Court
K.Yoganand vs The District Collector Of on 2 April, 2025
Author: S.M.Subramaniam
Bench: S.M.Subramaniam
W.A.No.2777 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
RESERVED ON : 21.03.2025
PRONOUNCED ON : 02.04.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR
WA No. 2777 of 2024
and
CMP.No.20350 of 2024
1. K.Yoganand
S/o.Kesavan, No.51A, Kamarajar
Street, Sevilimedu Village,
Kancheepuram-631 502.
Appellant(s)
Vs
1. The District Collector Of
Kancheepuram
Cum Appellate Tribunal, Office of the
District Collector, Kancheepuram-631
502.
2.Revenue Divisional Officer Cum
Maintenance Tribunal under the
Maintenance and Welfare of Parents
and Senior Citizens, Kancheepuram,
Kancheepuram-631 502.
3.K.Kasthuri
No.56, Bharathi Street, Mamallan
Page No.1/48
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
W.A.No.2777 of 2024
Nagar, Kancheepuram-631 502.
4.Yogakumari
No.56, Bharathi Street, Mamallan
Nagar, Kancheepuram-631 502.
5.G.Yogeswari
No.56 Bharathi Street, Mamallan
Nagar, Kancheepuram - 631 502.
6.Sub Registrar
No.2 Joint Sub Registrar,
Kancheepuram - 631 502.
Respondent(s)
PRAYER
Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order
dated 13-06-2024 in WP.No.20797 of 2022 and allow this Writ Appeal.
For Appellant(s): Mr.Naveen Kumar Murthi
for Mr.S.PRABHU
For Respondent(s): Mr.M.R.Jothimanian
for Mr. G.Punniakotti for R3
Mr.Vadivelu Deenadayalan
Additional Government Pleader for
R1,2&6
R4 & 5 Not ready in notice
Page No.2/48
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
W.A.No.2777 of 2024
JUDGMENT
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM J.
Table of Contents:
S.No TOPIC PAGE
. No.
(A) Appeal filed before the Appellate 7
Authority
II. Arguments made on Behalf of the Appellant 10
rd
respondent/Senior Citizen
(A) Indian Constitution and Senior Citizens 12
Act
Act
of the Senior Citizens Act
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
Under assail is the order dated 13.06.2024 in W.P.No.20797 of
2022.
I. Facts in Brief:
2. The 3rd respondent Mrs.K.Kasthuri is the senior citizen,
who filed a complaint before the Tribunal/Revenue Divisional Officer,
Kanchipuram on 30.03.2021. The complaint reveals that the senior
citizen is an illiterate person and cannot read or write. She has one
son, Mr. Yoganand, and two daughters, Mrs. G. Yogeswari and
Mrs.Yogakumari. The husband of the senior citizen died in the year
2020. Thereafter, the senior citizen was compelled by her
son/appellant to settle the property in his name. On account of
compulsion and coercion, the 3rd respondent/senior citizen settled the
family property in the name of the appellant. Thereafter, the appellant
has not allowed the daughters of the senior citizen to enter into the
family house. The senior citizen was provided a small room in the
house. The appellant started neglecting the senior citizen. The
appellant in a drunken mode, threatened the senior citizen by stating
that the vacant plot belongs to the senior citizen, should not be settled
in favour of her daughters. However, the senior citizen settled the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
vacant plot in favour of her two daughters. The appellant physically
attempted to attack the daughters of the senior citizen with stone.
However, the persons standing nearby stopped him. Apart from the
property settled by the senior citizen in favour of the appellant, he has
a separate house and a land in his name. Thereafter, the senior
citizen was unable to live in her family/matrimonial house and
presently, she is living with her daughter. The husband of the senior
citizen was employed in Neyveli Lignite Corporation and after his
retirement, he purchased some jewels from and out of his retirement
benefits. 30 sovereigns of gold have been taken away by the appellant
from the senior citizen. With this complaint, the senior citizen prayed
for cancellation of the settlement deed and to recover the 30
sovereigns of gold jewelry taken away by the appellant from the senior
citizen.
3. The wife of the appellant Mrs.Priya, filed a defense
statement before the Tribunal. She states that her husband is working
in abroad for 15 years. The senior citizen is giving false complaint
against her and her husband. She admitted the fact the the senior
citizen settled the house property in the name of her
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
husband/appellant. However, the nearby vacant land was settled in
favour of the two daughters of the senior citizen. That apart, one acre
of land was settled in favour of the elder daughter of the senior citizen.
Initially the appellant and his wife were residing in a rented house and
thereafter, they have shifted to the house settled by the senior citizen.
The daughter-in-law of the senior citizen states that the senior citizen
is at liberty to live along with them at any point of time. At the instance
of the daughters, the senior citizen has filed a complaint. She
expressed her willingness to provide food and shelter to the senior
citizen. The Senior Citizens Tribunal considered the statements and
evidence of the parties and, after conducting an inquiry, passed an
order in proceedings Pa.Mu.1075/2021/A5, dated 30.11.2021,
granting a maintenance amount of Rs. 5,000/- to be paid by the
appellant and Rs. 2,500/- each to be paid by the two daughters. Not
satisfied with the order, the senior citizen preferred an Appeal before
the District Collector.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
(A). Appeal filed before the Appellate Authority:
4. The District Collector conducted an independent inquiry.
The senior citizen has given a statement before the District Collector,
stating about the harassment undergone by her. The statement of the
senior citizen before the District Collector was found to be serious and
the senior citizen said that the monthly compensation is not required,
since she is willing to live in her matrimonial house, where she lived
along with her husband till his death. She alleged that she was driven
out of the house and ill-treated both mentally and physically. Even the
appellant has not taken any steps to provide medical treatment to the
senior citizen. The daughters assisted her to get medical treatment.
5. The District Collector considered the statement of the
senior citizen and the defense statement made on behalf of the
appellant, and formed an opinion that the order for monthly
maintenance would be insufficient in the present case, since the
senior citizen must be allowed to reside in her matrimonial home,
where she lived along with her husband for several years. The said
relief alone will hold the dignity of the senior citizen. Accordingly, the
District Collector annulled the settlement deed registered in Document
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
No.2425/2020 dated 12.06.2020.
6. Challenging the said order of the District Collector, the
appellant preferred the Writ Petition.
(B).Writ Court's Findings:
7. The Writ Court elaborately considered the fact. The Writ
Court considered the term “Normal Life” emboldened under Section
4(2) of the Senior Citizens Act. It is not a mere life, but a life with
security and dignity. In the context of Article 21 of the Constitution of
India, it includes decent medical facilities, food, shelter with dignity
and security. When all such combined necessities of human life is
falling under the term “Normal Life”, simply providing food and shelter
would be insufficient and such a statement made by relatives of the
senior citizen, at no circumstances be trusted upon nor taken into
consideration either by the competent authority or by the Courts.
8. Therefore, the children/relatives defending their case,
merely on the ground that they are willing to provide food and shelter,
cannot be considered as a ground for the purpose of sustaining the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
settlement deed executed by the senior citizens. The requirements of
the provisions of the Act, the legislative intention and its spirit travels
beyond the assurance of the children/relatives of the senior citizens
that they will maintain the senior citizen. This special enactment
contemplates a life with dignity, including physical needs, love, and
care, which must be considered by the authority, while dealing with
complaints. The Writ Court considered the judgment of the Supreme
Court of India in the case of S.Vanitha vs. Deputy Commissioner,
Bengaluru Urban and District and Others1 and judgment of the
Kerala High Court in the case of Radhamani and Others vs. State of
Kerala2. Based on the legal principles settled by the Courts and
considering the objectives and the spirit of the Senior Citizens Act, the
Writ Court formed an opinion that the relief granted by the District
Collector in the appeal is in accordance with law, and consequently,
the Writ Petition came to be dismissed. Thus, the present Writ Appeal
has been instituted.
1 (2021) 15 SCC 730
2 2015 SCC OnLine Ker 33530
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
II. Arguments Made on Behalf of the Appellant:
9. Learned counsel for the appellant would mainly contend
that the condition, as stipulated under Section 23 of the Act is not
expressly made in the settlement deed. When Section 23
contemplates two conditions, in the absence of any condition in the
settlement deed, the complaint to declare the settlement deed as null
and void is not maintainable. The settlement deed in favour of the
appellant was executed by the 3rd respondent/senior citizen on her
own wish, without any undue influence or coercion, but out of love and
affection. She had settled the property on 10.06.2020 vide registered
Document No.2425 of 2020. Accordingly, the appellant has occupied
the said house along with his family. The appellant has not prevented
the senior citizen to live in the same house. The wife of the appellant
is ready to provide food and shelter to the senior citizen. Therefore, in
the absence of any condition in the settlement deed, the Writ Court
ought not to have confirmed the order of the District Collector. The
settlement deed executed is irrevocable and was executed by the
senior citizen on her own wish. That being so, the declaratory relief
granted is in violation of the provisions of the Transfer of Property Act,
1882. The statement made by the senior citizen before the District
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
Collector, stating that she was turned out from the family house, is
false. She was permitted to reside in the same house. The statement
given by the wife of the appellant before the Tribunal that they are
ready to maintain the senior citizen, ought to have been considered by
the Writ Court. Thus, the Writ Order is to be set aside.
III. Submissions Made on Behalf of the 3rd Respondent/Senior
Citizen:
10. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 3rd
respondent/senior citizen would oppose by stating that the statement
given by the senior citizen before the Tribunal and the Appellate
authority are categorical, and she was subjected to harassment, both
mentally and physically. She was driven out of her family house,
where she lived along with her husband for several decades. The
property was settled with a fond hope that the appellant and his wife
would maintain the senior citizen till her life time. Merely providing
food and shelter would be insufficient to comply with the provisions of
the Senior Citizens Act.
11. The settlement deed expressly states that it was executed
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
due to love and affection and to protect the future of the appellant.
Therefore, the love and affection being the consideration, the conduct
of the appellant after execution of the settlement deed was taken into
account by the District Collector and the Writ Court in the context of
the provisions of the Senior Citizens Act. Thus, there is no infirmity in
the Writ order and it is to be sustained.
IV. Legal Position:
12. This Court has elaborately considered the legal principles,
governing the provisions of the Senior Citizens Act in the case of
S.Mala Vs. District Arbitrator and District Collector, Nagapatinam
District reported in neutral citation 2025 MHC 706. In yet another
judgment also, this Court has considered the legal principles in
WA.No.3178 of 2024 dated 01.04.2025. The legal principles
considered are as under,
(A). Indian Constitution and Senior Citizens Act:
13. The essence of law is to serve and secure social solidarity,
ensuring that individuals fulfill their obligations as members of society.
Social welfare legislations emerge as instruments of justice, designed to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
safeguard vulnerable groups and maintain societal balance. The
Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 is a
significant enactment that embodies this philosophy by protecting the rights
and dignity of elderly citizens of our great nation.
14. Welfare systems differ across countries, but they commonly
provide support to the poor, unemployed, disabled individuals, the elderly
and those with dependent children. In a broader sense, welfare refers to the
overall well-being of individuals or groups, encompassing health,
happiness, safety, economic prosperity, and social security. A truly welfare-
oriented state ensures not just basic needs but also a dignified and fulfilling
life for its citizens. Providing for the welfare of the general public is a
fundamental responsibility of the Government.
15. The Senior Citizens Act, 2007 is a direct reflection of these
constitutional philosophy and ethos, ensuring that the elderly, who have
contributed to society throughout their lives, are not abandoned or deprived
of their basic necessities and physical needs. The vision of Article 41 of the
Constitution of India is to protect the rights and interest of senior citizens
and enable them to lead a life with dignity and respect. Thus, the Act
provide a comprehensive framework for ensuring the well-being of senior
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
citizens of our great nation.
16. The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
1948, recognizes human dignity as a fundamental aspect of human rights.
Ensuring a dignified life for all individuals is a primary duty of the State.
Addressing concerns about the treatment of older persons, the Open-
Ended Group on Aging, in its first session, observed that:"Another central
challenge for older persons is living with dignity. The very process of ageing
could threaten older people’s dignity as they were perceived by others to be
inherently less valuable to society. Independence, participation, and
autonomy were critical components of dignity. In particular, older persons
should be perceived as active members of their societies and not only as
recipients of social protection2"
17. Despite the constitutional assurances, ensuring a dignified life
for senior citizens remains a challenge in contemporary society. While
Article 21 guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, the meaning of a
dignified life in old age depends on the legitimate needs of senior citizens.
2These observations were noted by the Chair, while
submitting the report of the First Open Ended Working Group
on Aging.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
18. The Supreme Court, in F.Francis Coralie Mullin v.
Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi3 expanded the scope of Article 21
of the Constitution of India, recognizing that:
"We think that the right to life includes the right to
live with human dignity and all that goes along
with it, namely, the bare necessaries of life such
as adequate nutrition, clothing and shelter and
facilities for reading, writing and expressing
oneself in diverse forms, freely moving about and
mixing and commingling with fellow human
beings. Of course, the magnitude and content of
the components of this right would depend upon
the extent of the economic development of the
country, but it must, in any view of the matter,
include the right to the basic necessities of life and
also the right to carry on such functions and
activities as constitute the bare minimum
expression of the human-self."
19. This interpretation of Article 21 reinforces the right of senior
citizens to a dignified life in their old age. As individuals grow older, they
often become financially, physically, and emotionally dependent on their
families or society. However, neglect, abandonment, and lack of proper
3 A.I.R. 1981 746.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
care have become serious issues affecting the elderly.
(B). The Scheme Under the Senior Citizens Act:
20. The statement of objects and reasons of the Bill which was
introduced in the Parliament declares as follows:
“Traditional norms and values of the Indian society
laid stress on providing care for the elderly.
However, due to withering of the joint family
system, a large number of elderly are not being
looked after by their family. Consequently, many
older persons, particularly widowed women are
now forced to spend their twilight years all alone
and are exposed to emotional neglect and to lack
of physical and financial support. This clearly
reveals that ageing has become a major social
challenge and there is a need to give more
attention to the care and protection for the older
persons. Though the parents can claim
maintenance under the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973, the procedure is both time-
consuming as well as expensive. Hence there is a
need to have simple, inexpensive and speedy
provisions to claim maintenance for parents. The
Bill proposes to cast an obligation on the persons
who inherit the property of their aged relatives to
maintain such aged relatives and also proposes to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
make provisions for setting-up oldage homes for
providing maintenance to the indigent older
persons. The Bill further proposes to provide
better medical facilities to the senior citizens and
provisions for protection of their life and property.”
21. The law has been made in order to cast an obligation on
the persons, who inherit the property of their aged relatives to
maintain such aged relatives and also proposes to make provisions for
setting-up oldage homes for providing maintenance to the indigent older
persons and also to provide better medical facilities to the senior citizens
and provisions for protection of their life and property, etc.
22. The objectives of the Act are summarised as follows:
a) To provide for appropriate mechanism to be set-up to provide
need-based maintenance to the parents and senior citizens from their
children, grandchildren or relatives as the case may be,
b) To provide for adequate medical facilities to senior citizens,
c) To provide for a suitable mechanism for protection of life and
property of senior citizens,
d) To provide for penal provision for abandonment of senior citizens,
e) To provide facilities for poor and destitute senior citizens,
f) To provide for setting up of old age homes in every district.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
23. The Senior Citizen Act is principally welfare legislation.
However, as it deals with two class of people; First, parent [Section
2(h)‘Senior citizen’ means “any person being a citizen of India, who has
attained the age of sixty years or above.”] , who may or may not be senior
citizens, and second, senior citizens. There is a possibility of the two
groups of people aligning congruently.
24. The Act refers to two terms, which can be read in conjunction,
‘maintenance’ and ‘welfare’. Section 2(b) of the Act states Maintenance
‘includes provision for food, clothing, residence and medical attendance and
treatment’ and ‘Welfare’ ‘means provisions for food, health care, recreation
centres and other amenities necessary for the senior citizens.’
25. For entitlement of maintenance under the Act, it is not
necessary that parents must be senior citizens, meaning thereby
parents need not have attained the threshold age of 60 years or more.
Parents and senior citizens are two classes complete and exclusive in
themselves. This is the reason section 4 of the Act provides entitlement to
both to get maintenance.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
26. Section 4 reads as
‘Maintenance of Parents and Senior Citizens:
1. A senior citizen including parent who is unable to maintain himself
from his own earning or property owned by him, shall be entitled to make
an application under section 5 in case of—
i. parent or grand-parent, against one or more of his children
not being a minor
ii. a childless senior citizen, against such of his relative referred
to in clause (g) of section 2.
2. The obligation of the children or relative, as the case may be, to
maintain a senior citizen extends to the needs of such citizen so that senior
citizen may lead a normal life.
3. The obligation of the children to maintain his or her parent extends
to the needs of such parent either father or mother or both, as the case may
be, so that such parent may lead a normal life.
4. Any person being a relative of a senior citizen and having sufficient
means shall maintain such senior citizen provided he is in possession of the
property of such senior citizen or he would inherit the property of such
senior citizen :
Provided that where more than one relatives are entitled to inherit the
property of a senior citizen, the maintenance shall be payable by such
relative in the proportion in which they would inherit his property.’
27. The scope of ‘maintenance’ includes within its ambit food,
clothing residence, medical attendance and treatment. The same shall be
considered while deciding maintenance allowance irrespective of gender of
parent. But if, an application is filed by senior citizens against relative who
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
would probably inherit that property the maintenance order shall be
considered from the point of view of ‘welfare’ which ‘means provisions for
food, health care, recreation centres, and other amenities necessary for the
senior citizens’. Defining the two terms distinctively may have two
connotations but whenever there is question of maintenance or
welfare of life and survival of parents and senior citizens, both
definitions must be seen from a cumulative perspective whereby life
includes conducive conditions for a normal life inclusive of dignity.
28. The term normal life should be considered as containing within
its scope dignified life while deciding maintenance or passing order for
welfare measures. In case of Dr. Ashwani Kumar v. Union of India4
Supreme Court opines:
‘We accept that the right to life provided for in
Article 21 of the Constitution must be given an
expansive meaning. The right to life, we
acknowledge, encompasses several rights but for
the time being we are concerned with three
important constitutional rights, each one of them
being basic and fundamental. These rights
articulated by the petitioner are the right to live
with dignity, the right to shelter and the right to
4 (2019) 2 SCC 636
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
health. The State is obligated to ensure that these
fundamental rights are not only protected but are
enforced and made available to all citizens.’
29. Children includes son, daughter, grandson and grand-
daughter but does not include a minor.’ [Section 2(a).] ‘Relative means
‘any legal heir of the childless senior citizen who is not a minor and is in
possession of or would inherit his property after his death.’ [ Section 2(g).]
Both words should be seen together to decipher the exact position of
maintenance of parents and senior citizens. The purpose of providing
definition of ‘children’ is basically to cover the matters of maintenance of
parents. Children are primarily the respondents in cases of application for
maintenance before the Tribunal under section 4. ‘Parents’ and ‘senior
citizens’ both are eligible to file an application for maintenance in case of
their inability to maintain themselves. Senior citizens, who do not have
any child, have also been extended protection but the process and
measures differ.
30. In order to meet the objective of the statute, there have been
instances where sons and daughters in law have been called for
maintaining the parents and senior citizens. However, the definition of
children and relatives should include the sons or daughters in law and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
therefore, changes in the provisions of the law is needed. [Balbir
Kaur v. Presiding officer Cum SDM]5.This change is exacerbated by the
fact that there are parents and senior citizens who do not have any child
within the statutory sense of the term but require maintenance and welfare.
Furthermore, an expansive meaning of the term would help ensure that no
parent or senior citizen is left out of the umbrella of the welfare.
31. Application for maintenance mentioned under section 4 may
be filed by a senior citizen or a parent as the case may be : or if he or she is
incapable, by any other person or organization authorized by him or her; or
if the facts come to the knowledge of the tribunal it may take suo
motu cognizance of the fact. In respect of the jurisdiction where such an
application maybe filed, section 6 provides that the application may be filed
where he or she resides or last resided or where the defendant i.e. children
or relative as the case may be, reside. The term ‘organization’ has been
explained in section 5 which means any voluntary association registered
under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, or any other law for the time
being in force. This is the duty of State Government to constitute the
tribunal for each sub-division, which shall be presided over by an officer not
below the rank of Sub-divisional officer of a state.
5 2015 SCC OnLine P&H 260
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
(C). Interpretation and Scope of Section 23 of the Senior Citizens Act:
32. The preamble as well as the statement of objects and reasons
clearly shows that the intention of the Parliament in enacting the law and
the purpose of the law has to be gathered in interpretative process. Sec.
23(1) provides that any senior citizen who, after the commencement of the
abovesaid Act, has transferred by way of gift or otherwise, his property,
subject to the condition that the transferee shall provide the basic amenities
and basic physical needs to the transferor and such transferee refuses or
fails to provide such amenities and physical needs, the said transfer of
property shall be deemed to have been made by fraud or coercion or under
undue influence etc.
33. Clause (1) of section 23 lays down following conditions for
transfer of property by senior citizens:
(a) transferee shall provide thebasic amenities and basic physical
needs to the transferor and
(b) such transferee refuses or fails to provide such amenities and
physical needs.
34. Many a times, senior citizens either to fulfill the demands of
their children or out of love and affection transfer their properties in favour
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
of the latter. Section 23(1) of the Act comes to the rescue of the former if
they are ill-treated or neglected by their children/relative after such transfer.
Under Section 23(1), such transfer is revocable at the option of the senior
citizen. It provides that where a senior citizen has transferred his property
by way of a gift deed or otherwise, subject to the condition that the
transferee shall provide basic amenities and physical needs to the
transferor and such transferee refuses or fails to provide such amenities
and physical needs, the transfer of such property shall be deemed to have
been made by fraud or coercion, or under undue influence6
35. In the case of Promil Tomar and Ors v. State of Haryana
and Ors7it was held that the word “otherwise” used under Section 23(1) of
the Act would include transfer of ownership, possession by way of a lease
deed, mortgage, licence, gift or sale deed.
“The word "otherwise" cannot be ignored for
the objective of Section 23 (1) of the Maintenance
Act. In context to the objectives of the Act,
"transfer" would mean that transfer of property by
senior citizen need not be a gift only but it could
be any transfer within the meaning of Transfer of
Property Act or would even include transferring of
6 Shabeen Martin v. Muriel, (2016) 4 KLJ 699
7 2013 SCC OnLine P&H 26819
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
any right of the nature of title or possession... A
senior citizen who had transferred his right, title or
interest to any other person by gift or otherwise
(which would include transfer of possession by
lease, mortgage or licence) would become void in
the event of transferee refusing to provide
amenities and physical needs. The said transfer in
such circumstances would be termed as fraud and
would be void.”
36. The plain language of Section 23 does not require the
condition referred to therein namely the condition that the transferee shall
provide the basic amenities and basic physical needs to the transferor, to
be stated in writing in the document that transfers the property or in any
other document”. The “condition” can be either express or implied and
should be understood based on the conduct of the transferee before
and after the execution of gift/ settlement deed.
37. In Smt. Sunita Bhasin v. State of NCT of Delhi8 held that, it
is implicit in any gift of property, that is executed out of natural love and
affection, that the transferee would reciprocate the love and affection and,
at the very least, provide the basic amenities and meet the physical needs
of the donor and express stipulation that the gift deed has been made on an
8 W.P.(C) 13139/2018
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
understanding that the transferee would look after the basic needs of the
donor is not necessary.
38. As per Section 17 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, “fraud”
includes any promise made without an intention of performing it. The third
proviso to Section 92 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 provides that the
existence of any separate oral agreement, constituting a condition
precedent to the attaching of any obligation under such contract, grant or
disposition of property may be proved. Thus, it is evident that there is no
requirement even under law that the “condition” should form part of the
written document .
39. Section 122 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (herein
“TP Act”) defines a gift as any transfer of certain existing movable and
immovable properties made voluntarily without any consideration. Section
126 of the TP Act provides for the suspension or revocation of a gift on
happening of any specified event upon which the donor and done have
agreed upon. Condition for maintenance during old age cannot be assumed
as a consideration for gift. More so, consideration specified under Section
122 refers to monetary consideration and natural love and affection. The
gift/settlement deed on a promise that the donee will look after the donor at
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
the old age is a transaction without consideration. It is, therefore, clear that
there is no inconsistency between the provisions of the TP Act and Section
23(1) of the Act.
40. Moreover, Section 23(1) is only an addition to the provisions of
the TP Act as it provides additional safeguards to the senior citizens. Even
if there is any inconsistency between Section 23(1) and provisions of the TP
Act, the former will prevail not because it has an overriding effect over the
other laws for the time being in force but, based on the legal maxim
“Generaliaspecialibus non derogant”, i.e., special enactment (the Act)
prevails over the general enactment (TP Act – a general law relating to
transfer of property).
41. Thus, while construing the provisions of Sec. 23 it is to be
borne in mind that in common law, a person could get a justiciable cause of
action so as to seek setting aside of a transfer deed like gift deed,
settlement deed, etc. only on limited grounds of actual fraud,
misrepresentation, coercion and undue influence, incompetency, etc. But
with the legislative intervention through the special provision in Sec. 23, a
senior citizen is enabled to seek setting aside of a transfer deed like
settlement deed, gift deed, etc. if he has so transferred the property with the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
explicit or implicit condition that the transferee shall provide the basic
amenities and necessities to him and in case of violation of such condition,
then a legal fiction is created that due to such violation, it shall be deemed
that the transfer of property shall be deemed to have been made by fraud or
coercion or misrepresentation.
42. So at the option of the transferor-senior citizen, he could seek
the voiding of such transfer by the Tribunal in those contingencies. So it
creates an extra-ordinary remedy by such legislative intervention to
aid the senior citizen. The creation of such legal fiction of “deemed
fraud/coercion/undue influence” by the above enactment is indeed a serious
inroad into the common law position of having to plead and prove actual
fraud/coercion/undue influence, etc. So the said provision in Sec. 23 has
to be interpreted and construed not only as a welfare legislation, but
also strictly, due to such serious substantial inroads made to the
common law scenario.
43. It is not provided in explicit and clear terms in Sec. 23 as to
whether the transferee against whom the relief under Sec. 23 is sought for
by the transferor senior citizen should necessarily be confined to
transferees who are relatives or children of the senior citizen/parent. Sec.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
2(g) of the abovesaid Act defines a “relative” and Sec. 2(a) thereof defines
the term, “children” to include son, daughter, grandson and grand-daughter
but does not include a minor.
44. The definitions' clause as per Sec. 2 of the Maintenance and
Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act clearly insists for a contextual
understanding of the various sub clauses therein, as it stipulates that the
various definitions are to be so understood, “unless the context otherwise
require”. The relevance and necessity for adherence to contextual
interpretation in appropriate cases has been underscored by the Apex
Court and various High Courts in a catena of rulings.
45. It would also be pertinent to refer to the canons of interpretative
construction based on the principle of purposive interpretation or
purposive construction. It will be relevant in that regard to refer to the
views of Aharon Barak, the eminent jurist and former President of the
Supreme Court of Israel, who in his illumating treatise “Purposive
Interpretation in Law” has pithly put it as follows: “Purposive interpretation is
based on three components : language, purpose, and discretion. Language
shapes the range of semantic possibilities within which the interpreter acts
as a linguist. Once the interpreter defines the range, he or she chooses the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
legal meaning of the text from among the (express or implied) semantic
possibilities. The semantic component thus sets the limits of interpretation
by restricting the interpreter to a legal meaning that the text can bear in its
(public or private) language.”
46. As held by the Apex Court in the judgement in Shailesh
Dhairyaman v. Mohan Balakrishna Lulla, reported in (2016) 3 SCC 619
p.641 para 31, that the principle of “purposive interpretation” or “purposive
construction” is based on the understanding that the court is supposed to
attach that meaning to the provisions which serve the “purpose” behind
such a provision. The basic approach is to ascertain what is it designed to
accomplish? And to put it otherwise to interpretative process the court is
supposed to realise the goal that the legal test is designed to realise,
etc.
47. Thus, the provisions of the Act, including Section 23, must be
read liberally and in a purposive manner. The principal object of the Act is
to enable the senior citizens and parents to secure their basic physical
needs and amenities and to void any transfers made with the understanding
that their needs would be looked after by the transferee, if the transferee
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
fails to live-up to the said commitment.
(D). Summary Procedure for Speedy Relief:
48. While Section 23 of the Act provides a legal remedy for senior
citizens to reclaim their property transferred under coercion, undue
influence, or fraud, Section 8 plays a crucial role in ensuring that such relief
is granted in an expeditious manner.
49. Section 8 of the Act mandates that the Maintenance Tribunal
shall adopt a summary procedure while conducting inquiries. This provision
ensures that senior citizens do not have to go through lengthy litigation to
secure their rights, thereby making the remedies under the Act more
accessible and effective.
50. The key features of Section 8 include:
1. Expedited Proceedings – The Tribunal is empowered to conduct
an inquiry in a summary manner, meaning that cases are resolved without
unnecessary procedural delays.
2. Quasi-Judicial Powers – The Tribunal possesses the powers of
a Civil Court for summoning evidence, enforcing the attendance of
witnesses, and compelling the production of documents.
3. No Full Adjudication of Title Required – Senior citizens seeking
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
eviction of abusive children/legal heirs or reclaiming transferred property
need only demonstrate some right, title, or interest in the property, rather
than proving absolute ownership.
51. The summary nature of proceedings under Section 8 aligns
with the spirit of the Act, which is to provide swift and effective justice to
senior citizens facing neglect, harassment, or financial exploitation.
52. Additionally, Maintenance Tribunals, while adjudicating claims
under Section 23, must take into consideration the need for prompt
intervention. They have the discretion to call for relevant documents,
including encumbrance certificates, to assess property claims. However,
requiring a full title adjudication would go against the very objective of the
Act, which is designed to provide immediate relief to senior citizens.
53. Thus, Section 8 complements Section 23 by ensuring that the
rights conferred under the Act are enforced without procedural hurdles.
54. The relevant portion of the judgment of this Court in the case of
S.Mala Vs. The District Arbitrator, is extracted as follows,
“....
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
(D) Case Laws on Senior Citizens Act:
36. The Three Judges Bench of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India in the case of S.Vanitha
vs. Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban
District and Others4, elaborately considered the
legislative scheme, rights of residence,
safeguarding against domestic violence etc. In
Paragraph No.24 of the judgment, the Apex Court
considered the distinction between sub-sections
(1) and (2) of Section 23. The conditions stipulated
expressly have been considered by the Court, but
the scope of interpretation, the beneficial
construction and the need for the protection needs
to be extended impliedly under the Senior Citizens
Act, have not been examined into by the Apex
Court in S.Vanitha's case cited supra. Therefore,
the expressed provision made under Section 23(1)
of the Act is one aspect of the matter and the
scope of certain implied benefits conferred under
Section 23 to the Senior Citizens is another aspect
of the matter, which is to be considered by this
Court in the context of the facts of each case.
37. In the case of Sudesh Chhikara vs.
Ramti Devi and Others5 in paragraph No.13, the
Hon'ble Supreme Court made an observation as
under;
4 2021 15 SCC 730
5 MANU/SC/1581/2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
“........
13. When a senior citizen parts with
his or her property by executing a gift or
a release or otherwise in favour of his or
her near and dear ones, a condition of
looking after the senior citizen is not
necessarily attached to it. On the
contrary, very often, such transfers
are made out of love and affection
without any expectation in return.
Therefore, when it is alleged that the
conditions mentioned in sub-section (1)
of Section 23 are attached to a transfer,
existence of such conditions must be
established before the Tribunal.”
38. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
above case regarding the scope of Section 23(1)
of the Act, made an observation that “On the
contrary, very often, such transfers are made out
of love and affection without any expectation in
return”. It would be sufficient to form an opinion
that the Apex Court considered the implied
conditions in the said case. However, the Apex
Court further observed by stating that, if it is
alleged that the conditions mentioned in sub-
section (1) of Section 23 are attached to a
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
transfer, the existence of such conditions must be
established. Therefore, the Apex Court considered
that, very often transfers are made out of love and
affection, and in the event of any conditions
expressly made in the document, it must be
established.
39. Importantly, in Urmila Dixit's case cited
supra, the Hon'ble Supreme Court further clarified
the scope of Senior Citizens Act in Paragraph
Nos.23, 24 and 25, which reads as under,
“......
23. The Appellant has submitted
before us that such an undertaking
stands grossly unfulfilled, and in her
petition under Section 23, it has been
averred that there is a breakdown of
peaceful relations inter se the parties.
In such a situation, the two conditions
mentioned in Sudesh (supra) must be
appropriately interpreted to further the
beneficial nature of the legislation and
not strictly which would render otiose
the intent of the legislature. Therefore,
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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
senior citizens were not complied with.
We are unable to agree with the view
taken by the Division Bench, because it
takes a strict view of a beneficial
legislation.
24. Before parting with the case
at hand, we must clarify the
observations made vide the impugned
order qua the competency of the
Tribunal to hand over possession of
the property. In S. Vanitha (supra), this
Court observed that Tribunals under
the Act may order eviction if it is
necessary and expedient to ensure the
protection of the senior citizen.
Therefore, 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.
25. Another observation of the
High Court that must be clarified, is
Section 23 being a standalone
provision of the Act. In our considered
view, the relief available to senior
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
citizens under Section 23 is intrinsically
linked with the statement of objects
and reasons of the Act, that elderly
citizens of our country, in some cases,
are not being looked after. It is directly
in furtherance of the objectives of the
Act and empowers senior citizens to
secure their rights promptly when they
transfer a property subject to the
condition of being maintained by the
transferee.”
40. The Apex Court in the above
judgment has considered the case of S.Vanitha
cited supra. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
case of Urmila Dixit cited supra culled out the
legal proposition that, even an implied condition
i.e., love and affection for execution of gift or
settlement deed would be sufficient enough for
nullifying the documents. The intent of the
legislature has been considered by the Apex
Court.
41. In the case of Mohamed Dayan vs.
The District Collector, Tiruppur District and
Others6, the Single Judge of this Court (SMSJ)
considered the scope of the Senior Citizens Act
6 MANU/TN/5114/2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
and the judgment of the Kerala High Court was
also taken into consideration. The relevant
paragraphs are extracted herein under,
“.......
34. In the context of the adoption
of the phrase “lead a normal life” Rule
20(2)(i) of the Maintenance of Senior
Citizen Rules, enumerates that “it shall
be the duty of the District Collector to
ensure that life and property of senior
citizens of the District are protected and
they are able to live with security and
dignity”. Therefore, normal life includes
security and dignity. Thus the normal
life as indicated under Section 4(2) of
the Act, is not mere life, but a life with
security and dignity. In the context of
Article 21 of the Constitution of India,
life includes decent medical facility,
food, shelter with dignity and security.
All such combined necessities of human
life is falling under the term “Normal
Life” emboldened under Section 4(2) of
the Senior Citizen Act. Therefore,
simply providing food and shelter would
be insufficient. But life includes
providing of decent medical facilities,
food, shelter and other requirements
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
with dignity in commensuration with the
status of the family and taking into
consideration of the living style of the
senior citizen throughout.
..................
..................
38. The Kerala High Court
observed in the case of Radhamani and
Others (cited supra), Section 23(1) of
the Senior Citizen Act, cannot be
interpreted to the disadvantage of the
senior citizen. Section 23(1) of the Act
contemplates that “Where any senior
citizen who, after the commencement of
this Act, has by way of gift or otherwise,
his property, subject to the condition
that the transferee shall provide the
basic amenities and basic physical
needs to the transferor and such
transferee refuses or fails to provide
such amenities and physical needs, the
said transfer of property shall be
deemed to have been made by fraud or
coercion or under undue influence and
shall at the option of the transferor be
declared void by the Tribunal”. The
phrase “ subject to the condition that the
transferee shall provide the basic
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
amenities” does not mean that the Gift
or Settlement Deed should contain any
such condition expressly. “Subject to
the condition” as employed in Section
23(1), is to be holistically understood
with reference to the subsequent phrase
i.e., “deemed to have been made by
fraud or coercion or undue influence”.
Both the phrases would amplify that the
deeming clause should be considered
so as to form an opinion that the phrase
“subject to condition” amounts to an
implied condition to maintain the senior
citizen and any violation would be
sufficient for the purpose of invoking
Section 23(1) of the Act, to cancel the
Gift or Settlement Deed executed by the
senior citizen.
.....................
....................
41. The entire purpose and object
of the Senior Citizens Act, is to consider
the human conduct towards them.
When the human conduct is indifferent
towards senior citizen and their security
and dignity are not protected, then the
provisions of the Act, is to be pressed
into service to safeguard the security
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
and dignity of senior citizen. Therefore,
the purposive interpretation of the
provisions are of paramount importance
and Section 23 of the Act, cannot be
mis-utilised for the purpose of rejecting
the complaint filed by the senior citizen
on the ground that there is no express
condition for maintaining the senior
citizen. Even in the absence of any
express condition in the document,
“Love and Affection” being the
consideration for execution of Gift or
Settlement Deed, such love and
affection becomes a deeming
consideration and any violation is a
ground to invoke Section 23(1) of the
Act. Thus there is no infirmity in respect
of the order passed by the second
respondent in the present case.”
42. In the case of Radhamani and
Others vs. State of Kerala7, the learned Single
Judge of the Kerala High Court considered
Section 122 of Transfer of Property Act, 1882. In
paragraph No.11 of the judgment, it is observed
that, “Section 23 of the Senior Citizens Act, 2007
does not contemplate that the condition should
7 2015 SCC OnLine Ker 33530
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
form part as recital in the deed of transfer. It only
refers that there should be a condition for such
transfer. This condition can be either express
or implied. If there is no express recital in the
deed, the Tribunal has to look around
circumstances to find out whether conduct
otherwise dispel the intention of donor to revoke.
The consideration for executing a gift deed or
settlement deed is based on human conduct,
caring and conscientious. Transfer admittedly is
out of love and affection. Any donor in a gift deed
would expect in a natural course of human
conduct that donee continues to behave in same
manner as behaved before execution of the deed.
The love and affection influenced for execution of
the deed certainly must be enduring and without
any barrier.” It is further stated that,
“..........
11. It is to be noted that the
special scheme in terms of Senior
Citizens Act, 2007 could declare
certain transfer as void, taking note of
the fact that by taking advantage of the
emotionally dependent senior citizens,
relatives grab the property on the
pretext of providing emotional support.
Therefore, legislature thought such
transaction could be declared as void
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
as the conduct leading to transaction
was based on malice or fraud.
Therefore, condition referred in
Section 23 has to be understood
based on the conduct of the transferee
and not with reference to the specific
stipulation in the deed of transfer.
Thus, this Court is of the view that it is
not necessary that there should be a
specific recital or stipulation as a
condition in the transfer of deed itself.
This condition mentioned in Section 23
is only referable as a conduct of the
transferee, prior to and after execution
of the deed of transfer. Thus,
challenge based on the ground that
there is no reference in the recital of
deed that transferee will provide basic
amenities and physical needs to the
transferor is of no consequence.”
43. In the case of Subhashini vs.
District Collector and Others8, the legal
proposition laid down by the learned Single Judge
in the Radhamni's case cited supra has been
approved by the Division Bench of the Kerala High
Court.
8 2020 SCC Online Ker 4080
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
44. In the case of Palanimuthu vs. The
Principal Officer, Maintenance
Tribunal/Revenue Divisional Officer, Namakkal
and Others9, the learned Single Judge of this
Court (SMSJ), considered the very same issues.
45. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India
in the recent case of Urmila Dixit cited supra
interpreted Section 23(1) of the Act to hold that
express condition in the deed may not be required
and non-maintenance of a senior citizen per se
would result in invoking the implied condition for
which such gift or settlement deed has been
executed by the senior citizen out of love and
affection, which is relatable to human conduct.
Thus, all other judgments of the High Courts
running counter to the principles laid down by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Urmila Dixit's case
denuded to lose its status as precedent.”
IV. Discussions:
55. The facts in the present case reveal that the senior citizen
executed the settlement deed due to love and affection and for the
better future of her son. However, after executing the settlement
9 MANU/TN/2011/2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
deed, the conduct of the son and his wife was indifferent towards the
senior citizen. According to the statement of the senior citizen before
the Tribunal and the Appellate authority/District Collector, she was
subjected to physical and mental harassment after her husband's
death in 2020. She made a specific allegation against her son, stating
that the settlement deed was executed forcibly and coercively. The
term expressly stated that the settlement deed has been executed out
of love and affection and for the better future of the appellant, would
be sufficient to satisfy the condition stipulated under Sections 23(1) of
the Senior Citizens Act. In this context, it is not necessary to explicitly
state that the children/relatives undertake to maintain the senior
citizen. It is sufficient that the property has been settled out of love and
affection, which is the consideration for executing the settlement or gift
deed. Thus, the condition expressly stated is the consideration and an
implied condition to satisfy the requirement under Section 23(1) of the
Senior Citizens Act. Therefore, this Court do not find any infirmity in
respect of the findings made by the Writ Court, which is in consonance
with the provisions of the Senior Citizens Act.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
V. Conclusion:
56. Thus, the order of the Writ Court dated 13.06.2024 in
WP.No.20797 of 2022 is confirmed and the present Writ Appeal stands
dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition
is closed.
(S.M.SUBRAMANIAM J.)(K.RAJASEKAR J.)
02-04-2025
GD
Index:Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Internet:Yes
Neutral Citation:Yes/No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
To
1.The District Collector Of
Kancheepuram
Cum Appellate Tribunal, Office of the
District Collector, Kancheepuram-631
2.Revenue Divisional Officer Cum
Maintenance Tribunal under the
Maintenance and Welfare of Parents
and Senior Citizens, Kancheepuram,
Kancheepuram-631 502.
3.K.Kasthuri
No.56, Bharathi Street, Mamallan
Nagar, Kancheepuram-631 502.
4.Yogakumari
No.56, Bharathi Street, Mamallan
Nagar, Kancheepuram-631 502.
5.G.Yogeswari
No.56 Bharathi Street, Mamallan
Nagar, Kancheepuram - 631 502.
6.Sub Registrar
No.2 Joint Sub Registrar,
Kancheepuram - 631 502.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM J.
AND
K.RAJASEKAR J.
GD
02.04.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/04/2025 11:12:16 am )
