Madras High Court
Dhanalakshmi vs Dhanraj on 3 November, 2025
Author: S.M.Subramaniam
Bench: S.M.Subramaniam, Mohammed Shaffiq
W.A.No.359 of 2022
--------------------------
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 03.11.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
W.A.No. 359 of 2022
Dhanalakshmi ...Appellant
Vs.
1.Dhanraj
2.The District Collector,
Krishnagiri District,
Krishnagiri.
3.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Hosur, Krishnagiri District.
4.Rajkumar
5.Venkatesh Babu ...Respondents
PRAYER: The Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent praying
to set aside the order dated 28.01.2022 passed in W.P.No.2360 of 2020 and
consequently dismiss the Writ Petition No.2360 of 2020.
For Appellant : Mr.T.Saikrishnan
For Respondents : Ms.J.Swetha
for Mr.K.Goviganesan for R1
Mr.Vadivelu Deenadayalan,
Addl. Govt. Pleader for R2 and R3
R4 – No appearance
R5 – Not ready in notice.
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 09:26:19 pm )
W.A.No.359 of 2022
--------------------------
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.)
Writ order dated 28.01.2022 made in W.P.No.2360 of 2020 is under
challenge in the present intra-Court appeal.
2. Fifth respondent in Writ Petition is appellant before this Court. First
respondent Mr.Dhanraj is a senior citizen and submitted an application before
Senior Citizens Tribunal under provisions of the Maintenance and Welfare of
Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 [hereinafter referred to as “The Act”]
seeking cancellation of gift deed executed by him on 15.02.2007 in favour of
appellant. Appellant is the daughter of senior citizen Dhanraj. Property gifted
is a self-acquired property of Dhanraj. Appellant would submit that she
borrowed loans and constructed a building. Admittedly five houses are
constructed in the said property and leased out to third parties. Appellant
settled the property in favour of her husband, who in turn is receiving rents
from lessees. Since appellant has not looked after 1st respondent / senior
citizen, he made an application seeking cancellation of gift deed.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Hosur adjudicated the issues by
affording opportunity to parties and declined to grant relief of cancellation of
gift deed. Aggrieved by said order, senior citizen preferred an appeal before
the District Collector. The District Collector passed orders under proceedings
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 09:26:19 pm )
--------------------------
dated 22.11.2019 confirming the order passed by the Revenue Divisional
Officer, Hosur. Thus, Writ Petition came to be instituted by senior citizen. Writ
Court granted the following relief:-
12. In the facts and circumstances as aforesaid, this
Court is inclined to dispose of the writ petition with the following
directions:-
(a) The 5th respondent is directed to pay the monthly
maintenance amount of Rs.10,000/- to the petitioner on or
before the 5th of every English calendar month;
(b) The petitioner is directed to communicate a copy of
the aforesaid order to the 5th respondent through Registered
Post with Acknowledgement Due;
(c) On receipt of a copy of the order, the 5th respondent
is directed to pay the arrears of maintenance from1.3.2019 till
date to the petitioner within a period of one week from the date
of receipt of a copy of the order; and
(d) If the 5th respondent pays the maintenance amount
regularly, respondents 1 and 2 shall not evict the 5th
respondent from the premises and failure to pay the amount of
Rs.10,000/- every month, the petitioner shall communicate the
said fact to respondents 1 and 2 and on receipt of the said
communication, respondents 1 and 2 are directed not only to
evict the 5th respondent from the subject property, but also
cancel the settlement deed granted in favour of the 5th
respondent and hand over possession of the house and house
site to the petitioner and also register a case under the Act
against the 5th respondent.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 09:26:19 pm )
--------------------------
4. Aggrieved by directions issued by Writ Court to pay monthly
maintenance of Rs.10,000/-, present intra-Court appeal came to be instituted.
5. Mr.T.Sai Krishnan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of appellant
would submit that appellant is ready and willing to pay monthly maintenance of
Rs.10,000/-. However, cancellation of gift deed cannot be done in view of fact
that the Act came into force with effect from 29.09.2008, but gift deed was
executed by 1st respondent on 15.02.2007, which is prior to the Act. Thus,
rejection order passed both by the Revenue Divisional Officer and the District
Collector are in accordance with law.
6. The learned counsel for 1st respondent would oppose by stating that
1st respondent senior citizen is suffering from cancer and taking continuous
treatment for more than 10 years. To substantiate said submission, medical
records are placed before this Court. First respondent would submit that he is
now residing in a rented house and not allowed to live in his own property,
gifted in favour of appellant/ daughter of senior citizen.
7. Present case was heard on multiple occasions by this Court. On
instructions, learned counsel appearing on behalf of parties to the lis would
contend that appellant is ready and willing to pay monthly maintenance of
Rs.10,000/-. However, learned counsel for 1st respondent would submit that a
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 09:26:19 pm )
--------------------------
sum of Rs.10,000/- as maintenance would be insufficient to meet out medical
expenses, since 1st respondent is taking treatment for cancer for more than 10
years and presently he is aged about 86 years. He is residing in rental house
and therefore senior citizen would contend that atleast ground floor portion of
said house may be allotted to him till his life time, enabling to spend his life in
his own property.
8. At this juncture the learned counsel appearing for appellant would
submit that appellant may be permitted to withdraw the present Writ Appeal.
9. This Court declined to accept said request, since, case was argued
on several occasions and this Court also expressed its views regarding
objectives of the Act to protect life and interest of senior citizen under
provisions of the Act. As far as monthly maintenance of Rs.10,000/- is
concerned, appellant has no objection to pay without committing any default.
As far as subject property is concerned, it is not in dispute that it is a self-
acquired property of 1st respondent and gifted in favour of appellant. Right to
life of a senior citizen must be ensured under provisions of the Act.
10. “Maintenance” has been defined under Section 2(b) of the Act, which
include provisions for food, clothing, residence and medical attendance and
treatment. Section 4(2) of the Act enumerates that obligation of children or
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 09:26:19 pm )
--------------------------
relatives, as the case may be, to maintain senior citizen extends to meeting
their needs so they can lead a normal life. The word “normal life” is to be
interpreted pragmatically to assure that senior citizen is able to live
incommensurate to his status and without compromising his needs. Normal
life cannot be construed as mere life. In the present case, 1st respondent
senior citizen was holding post of Deputy Superintendent of Police and led a
decent life. Therefore, his standard of life is to be protected to ensure normal
life within the meaning under Section 4(2) of the Act.
11. Since appellant has promised that she will continue to pay monthly
maintenance of Rs.10,000/- to 1st respondent/ senior citizen, this Court has to
protect residence of senior citizen in his self acquired property. Rule 20 of the
Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Rules provides
“Duties and powers of the District Collector”. Rule 20(2)(i) states that it shall
be 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.
12. In the present case, senior citizen is presently residing in a rented
house. But, learned counsel for appellant would submit that he is living along
with his son. Even in such a case, senior citizen is entitled to have right of
residence in his self-acquired property till his life time. It is not in dispute that
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 09:26:19 pm )
--------------------------
subject property is a self-acquired property of senior citizen and gifted in
favour of appellant and five independent portions in one block are constructed.
Thus right of senior citizen minimum to occupy ground floor portion should be
ensured by this Court, to protect his life, enabling him to lead his life with
security and dignity.
13. “Right to life” under Article 21 includes shelter. Thus, right of
residence cannot be denied to senior citizen, for occupying one portion of
property. That apart, after execution of gift deed by 1st respondent / senior
citizen in favour of appellant, she has transferred subject property in favour of
her husband. Husband of appellant is now receiving rents from five portions.
Therefore, this Court is of considered view that entire ground floor portion is to
be handed over to senior citizen to lead his life with security and dignity along
with monthly maintenance of Rs.10,000/- as ordered by Writ Court, which is to
be paid by appellant on or before 10th of every English calendar month.
14. In view of facts and circumstances, Writ order impugned stands
modified to an extent of handing over ground floor portion of subject property
situate at Door No.4/382, I Street, Moovendar Nagar, Bogalur Road, Hosur –
635 1019, Krishnagiri District to senior citizen/ 1st respondent till his life time.
Appellant and her husband shall possess the remaining portions at first floor
and second floor of the building.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 09:26:19 pm )
--------------------------
15. The District Collector, Krishnagiri District is directed to vacate
ground floor portion of the building at Door No.4/382, I Street, Moovendar
Nagar, Bogalur Road, Hosur – 635 1019, Krishnagiri District within a period of
two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and handover the
said portion to 1st respondent Senior citizen Mr.Dhanraj and protect his life and
dignity, enabling him to lead peaceful life in said property till his life time.
Appellant is directed to cooperate with the District Collector for vacating
property and to handover the same to senior citizen. Appellant is directed to
pay monthly maintenance of Rs.10,000/- to 1st respondent as per order of writ
Court, impugned in present Writ Appeal.
16. Accordingly, Writ Appeal stands disposed of. No costs.
(S.M.S., J.) (M.S.Q., J.)
03.11.2025
dsa
Index :Yes/No
Neutral Citation :Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 09:26:19 pm )
--------------------------
To
1.The District Collector,
Krishnagiri District,
Krishnagiri.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Hosur, Krishnagiri District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 09:26:19 pm )
--------------------------
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
and
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
dsa
03.11.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 09:26:19 pm )
