Only Senior Citizen Who Gave Property Can Cancel Gift Deed, Spouse Cannot: Madras HC
Court rejected a mother's plea to cancel her late husband's property transfer to their son, holding she lacked legal standing under the Senior Citizens Act
The Madras High Court recently observed that as per the scheme of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, only the senior citizen who has transferred the property can seek its cancellation under Section 23(1) of the Act. Third parties, including close family members like a spouse, cannot initiate such proceedings, it clarified.
The bench of Justice N. Anand Venkatesh emphasized, 'Except a transferor, no other person can maintain an application under Section 23(1) of the Act before the Authority concerned." Court made it clear that the statutory right to seek cancellation of a gift or settlement deed lies exclusively with the senior citizen who executed the transfer.
A settlement deed was executed by petitioner Karuppan's father in his favour in 1997. Years after the father's death, Karuppan's mother approached the Sub-Collector in 2019, alleging that her son had failed to take care of her. Relying on Section 23(1) of the Act, she sought cancellation of the deed. The Sub-Collector allowed her request and annulled the deed, citing neglect. Karuppan's appeal against this was dismissed as infructuous after his mother passed away in November 2019.
Challenging the order of deed cancellation, Karuppan moved the high court, arguing that firstly, the deed had no clause requiring him to maintain his parents. Secondly, his mother was not the executant of the deed and had no legal standing to seek its cancellation.
Deciding in Karuppan's favour, the high court pointed out that for Section 23(1) to apply, three key conditions must be met: the transfer must be made by a senior citizen; it must be conditional upon the transferee providing basic amenities and needs; and such condition must be violated. Importantly, the deed must explicitly record this obligation.
Love and affection is not a legal consideration. A gift made out of love is not the same as one made subject to specific obligations, the court observed, drawing on the Supreme Court's decisions in Sonia Bhatia v. State of U.P., Sudesh Chhikara v. Ramti Devi, and Urmila Dixit v. Sunil Sharan Dixit.
The court further clarified that under the scheme of the Act, only the senior citizen who executed the transfer (in this case, the father) could have sought cancellation under Section 23(1). Since the mother was not the transferor, her application was legally untenable.
'The second respondent ought not to have entertained the said application and passed orders," the court opined.
Concluding that the 1997 settlement was absolute, irrevocable, and not conditional upon the son's care, the court quashed the 2019 cancellation order and directed the Sub-Registrar to restore the original deed in the land records.
First Published:
June 25, 2025, 14:20 IST
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
4 hours ago
- Time of India
Stanford brings back SAT, ACT scores for Fall 2026 admissions: What students need to know
Stanford University has confirmed that standardised test scores will once again be a mandatory part of its undergraduate admissions process, beginning with the Fall 2026 application cycle. The move, which reverses a pandemic-era test-optional policy introduced in 2021, means applicants must now submit either Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT) or American College Testing (ACT) scores for their applications to be considered complete. The university's updated admissions criteria, published this week, also state that legacy status will continue to be considered in the selection process, even as California moves to restrict the practice in institutions that accept public funds. The dual announcements are reshaping how students, especially those applying from California, may approach one of the country's most competitive university admissions processes. SAT, ACT scores now required again Stanford's shift back to requiring test scores follows a faculty-led review which found a meaningful correlation between standardised test performance and academic outcomes at the university. In an earlier statement, the university clarified that test scores are viewed as only one element in its holistic admissions process, and that there is no defined minimum Grade Point Average (GPA) or test score for applicants. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like No annual fees for life UnionBank Credit Card Apply Now Undo 'Academic potential remains the primary lens through which applications are evaluated,' the university wrote in a previous public update, according to The Stanford Daily . It added that standardised test scores can serve as a useful signal of preparedness when reviewed alongside school grades, course rigor, recommendation letters, and personal essays. According to The Stanford Daily, Brad Howard, associate vice president for University communications, noted in an email that the decision was timed to allow prospective students sufficient time to prepare. For current high school students planning to apply in the upcoming cycle, this reinstated requirement may affect how they prioritise test prep and application timelines in the coming months. What this means for applicants For students who began high school under a test-optional landscape, the return of SAT and ACT scores as required materials may present both a strategic and psychological shift. Applicants will now need to balance academic coursework, extracurriculars, and essays with the added pressure of standardised test preparation. Still, the university has emphasised that scores are considered in context. Students from schools with limited access to test preparation resources or those facing personal challenges during testing may use the additional components of the application to present a fuller picture of their background and potential. It is worth noting that many peer institutions, including MIT and Yale, have also recently reinstated test score requirements, citing similar research on academic performance and equity, as noted by The Stanford Daily . This suggests that standardised testing may be regaining influence in elite admissions, even as national debates about access and fairness continue. Legacy admissions policy remains In a separate but closely related development, Stanford also announced that it will continue considering legacy status, that is, whether an applicant has family members who attended the university, despite the passage of Assembly Bill 1780 in California. The new legislation prohibits universities that receive state-funded financial aid from giving admissions preference based on legacy or donor connections. According to The Stanford Daily , to comply with this law without changing its admissions approach, Stanford will withdraw from the Cal Grant program, a state-funded initiative that supports college costs for qualifying California residents. Instead, the university has committed to covering financial aid using its own institutional funds, ensuring that eligible students continue to receive support. For students, the return of testing makes early planning more important than ever. Whether that means registering for fall test dates, seeking out preparation resources, or understanding how your scores fit into a broader application strategy, the key is to stay informed and begin preparing early. TOI Education is on WhatsApp now. Follow us here. Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
Time of India
8 hours ago
- Time of India
Funds unused, compensatory afforestation falls short in state, green cover remains static
Gurgaon: Haryana, the state with lowest forest cover in India, sanctioned Rs 1,000 crore for compensatory afforestation, but utilised just 55% of the amount in the five years between 2019 and 2024. That leaves Rs 450 crore – money that was meant to carry out plantation drives – unused. This discrepancy was reported by the Haryana forest department in a July 11 submission to the central empowered committee (CEC) of the Supreme Court, which is scrutinising the efficacy of compensatory afforestation (CA) drives and the use of CA funds across all states and Union territories. You Can Also Check: Gurgaon AQI | Weather in Gurgaon | Bank Holidays in Gurgaon | Public Holidays in Gurgaon These drives, which involve planting saplings or seeds, are mandatory under the Compensatory Afforestation Fund Management and Planning Authority (CAMPA) whenever forest land is given to carry out development work such as construction of industries and roads. The scheme, introduced by the central govt in 2004, is critical for a project's green clearance. More importantly, it is meant to help sustain the percentage of green cover in areas that are rapidly being concretised and make up for ecological damages. The forest department said in its submission to CEC that it carried out plantation drives over 5,000 hectares in five years. It did not specify where the drives were carried out. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Discover the AI-powered language app that's changing how everyone learns Talkpal AI Undo Activists and experts on Wednesday said that while plantation funds remain unutilised, the state has seen little change in its forest cover. A study of satellite imagery by the Forest Survey of India (FSI) shows that forest cover in the state increased 28sqm, or 2,800 hectares, between 2019 and 2023. "Haryana's forest cover is merely 3.5% of the state's geographical area. At such a time, when the state has critically low forest cover, nearly Rs 450 crore remains unutilised under CAMPA," said Gaurav Bansal, a Supreme Court advocate who frequently takes up cases related to violations of environmental laws. Vaishali Rana, an environmentalist, said, "The data points to a fundamental disconnect between plantation targets and actual forest growth. Without ecological planning, site selection, and post-plantation care, you can spend crores and still not get a forest."Rana added that the state govt should form a committee to audit compensatory afforestation drives. Principal chief conservator of forests (PCCF) Vineet Kumar Garg told TOI that the recent FSI figures don't fully reflect Haryana's plantation efforts. "First, FSI uses satellite imagery that isn't high-resolution. As a result, plantations carried out last year or this year may not show up in the data. The latest FSI report is based on satellite images from Oct 2022 — so, it misses most recent plantations. Moreover, even current plantations need three to four years to grow enough to register as canopy cover," Garg said. On funds, he said data submitted to CEC highlights "fund allocation, not actual spending". "For example, in 2024–25, the annual plan of operation (APO) proposed Rs 250 crore. Of this, only Rs 110 crore was approved, and that too after the monsoon, which delayed plantation work. Actual expenditure was just Rs 79 crore. This was not included in the data submitted to CEC," the PCCF said.
Hindustan Times
8 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Lack of OC at Willingdon View: 27 residents of Tardeo highrise get 3 weeks to vacate illegally occupied flats: HC
MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court on Wednesday granted three weeks' time to 27 families residing on the upper 18 floors of a highrise in Tardeo to vacate their flats, which lack an Occupancy Certificate (OC). The court said that if they fail to comply, the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) must evict the residents and seal the premises. Mumbai, India. July 02, 2025: View of Willingdon Heights at Tardeo area in south Mumbai. Mumbai, India. July 02, 2025. (Photo by Raju Shinde/ HT Photo) (Raju Shinde) The direction comes five days after the Supreme Court refused to stay the High Court's earlier eviction order, calling it 'very well considered, bold and lucid'. The apex court also allowed the Willingdon View Co-operative Housing Society, which owns the building, to approach the High Court for more time to vacate. The High Court bench of justice GS Kulkarni and justice Arif Doctor made it clear on Wednesday that the extension was being granted purely on humanitarian grounds and warned that no further leniency would be shown. The petition was originally filed by a resident, Sunil Jhaveri, who flagged illegal construction and structural changes in the 34-storey building. While the lower 16 floors have a partial OC, the top 18 floors were built without one and the entire structure lacks a fire department No Objection Certificate (NOC), making occupation of the upper floors illegal. The building has been partially occupied since 2008. On July 15, the High Court ordered eviction of the upper-floor occupants, prompting the society to approach the Supreme Court. On August 1, the top court upheld the High Court's order, with justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan remarking, 'At the end of the day, the rule of law must prevail.' They also praised the High Court's 'courage and conviction' in dealing with unauthorised constructions. Following this, the housing society returned to the High Court seeking four weeks' time to vacate. Its counsel argued that the families needed time to find alternative accommodation nearby, especially as some children were enrolled in schools in the area. The High Court agreed to extend the deadline by three weeks, but stressed that this was a 'mercy plea' and warned that no further extensions would be granted. 'We permit the residents to occupy the respective flats for a period of three more weeks at their own risk and consequence in the event of any untoward incident,' the court stated. It also directed the society to file an undertaking within two days, and ordered the BMC to take immediate action — including eviction and sealing of the flats — if the occupants failed to vacate within the given timeframe.
