Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007
Section 1—Airm and object—Act has been brought into force to provide adequate maintenance and effective welfare to old parents and senior citizens, by making it a legal obligation on adult children and heirs by way of inexpensive and speedy procedures—Aim and objectives of the Act are required to be given due effect.
[Para 17]
Section 23—Declaration of gift deed as void—Order dismissing application filed by petitioner-mother—Challenged—Property was owned by the mother and has been gifted to the son—Contention of the first respondent/son that there is no obligation on the part of the son to take care of his mother during her old age, as there is no such obligation imposed in the gift deed—Rejected—A mother or father if during their lifetime were to transfer a property by way of gift, leaving them without the benefit of the property during their lifetime, a reasonable expectation that their offspring be it either a son or a daughter would take care of their requirements in their old age can be so imputed, when there is a specific pleading in the application under Section 23 of the Senior Citizens Act—Further contention that when the gift deed was executed, the mother was aged 53 years as such, the benefit of Section 23 of the Act cannot be availed by her—Unaccepted—It is not required for the donor or releaser to be a senior citizen on the day on which gift or release deed is executed—During pendency of petition, the father of first respondent has expired leaving behind only the mother—Last contention that maintenance petition filed by mother is dismissed and the after the death of father the mother will be entitled to family pension hence, there is no requirement to maintain the mother—Despite enquiry the submission on behalf of first respondent is that he will not take care of the day to day needs of the petitioner-mother but would only make payment of medical expenses, this would not satisfy the requirements of the mother, the son despite receipt of the property is unwilling to take care of the requirements of the aged mother—Assistant Commissioner having dismissed the application filed by the petitioner only on the ground that there is no obligation under the gift deed for first respondent take care of the petitioner, does not stand the test as laid down by the Apex Court in Sudesh Chhikara v. Ramti Devi, Civil Appeal No. 174 of 2021 and as such, it is required to be set aside—Impugned order set aside and gift is declared void—Petition allowed. [Constitution of India, 1950, Article 226]
[Paras 11 to 19]