Read Time: 08 minutes

Synopsis

The Madras High Court has held that love and affection are implied conditions within the meaning of Section 23(1) of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (the Act).

"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", said the bench of Justice SM Subramaniam. 

Court said that the children defending their case merely on the ground that they are willing to provide food and shelter, cannot be taken as a ground for the purpose of sustaining the Settlement Deed executed by the senior citizen.

"The requirement of the provisions are to be complied with in its real spirit and in the event of an iota of doubt, the Authority Competent is empowered to cancel the Settlement Deed or Gift Deed, as the case may be, in order to protect the normal life of senior citizen," said the court. 

Court added that 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 and dignity of senior citizen," it said. 

Court stressed that 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.

Court was dealing with a writ petition filed by a son to quash the order passed by the Executive Magistrate And Revenue Divisional Officer cancelling the Settlement Deed executed by his mother in his favour by which a house had been transferred to him by his parents. 

The argument put forth by the son was that the house was purchased by him for his parents out of his own earnings and it was transferred to him by them without any expressed conditions.

On the other hand, the mother of the petitioner alleged that the petitioner, who lives on the fourth floor of the house, had neglected them and refused to maintain them. Therefore, they needed the house back for maintaining themselves. 

The single judge bench said, "Mostly the parents are executing the document in favour of their children. Since they may not be in a position to maintain the property at their old-age and more-so, they are intending to visibly express their love and affection towards their children by settling their properties".

"If at all the parents decide to settle the property in favour of a son or daughter, then they are doing so, only with love and affection and with a fond hope that they will be taken care of by the son or daughter during their old-age. Thus love and affection, being the consideration and implied condition, within the meaning of Section 23(1) of the Act," court underscored. 

In view of the same, court held that "the subsequent non-maintenance of senior citizen would attract Section 23(1) of the Act and the Authorities in such circumstances are empowered to declare the document as null and void". 

Court further clarified that Section 23 is referable as a conduct of the transferee prior to and after execution of the Deed of Gift or Settlement, as the case may be.

"For all purposes, Section 23 is to be understood taking note of the conduct of the transferee and not with reference to the specific stipulation of condition in the Deed of Gift or Settlement," it said. 

Accordingly, court dismissed the writ petition while holding that there was no infirmity or perversity in respect of the order impugned.

Case Title: Mohamed Dayan v. The District Collector and Others