The Court quashed the order cancelling a settlement deed granted to the petitioner under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, holding the impugned decision illegal and without jurisdiction.
The impugned order dated 10.01.2022 of the first respondent is quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.No.2591 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 06.06.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
W.P.No.2591 of 2022 and WMP.Nos.2729 & 2730 of 2022
1.Mallika
2.Senthamilselvi
3.Malathi ...Petitioners
Vs.
PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India p raying to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records on the file of the first respondent in Pa.Mu.A6/707/2021 dated 10.01.2022 and quash the same as illegal, incompetent and without jurisdiction.
For Petitioners : M/s.V.Srimathi
1/7
W.P.No.2591 of 2022
For Respondents For R1 : Mr.S.J.Mohammed Sathik, Government Advocate For R2 : No appearance
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed challenging the order
passed by the first respondent dated 10.01.2022 thereby cancelled the settlement deed executed in favour of the first petitioner under Section 23(1) of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.
second respondent before this Court either in person or through pleader.
2/7
W.P.No.2591 of 2022
said property had devolved upon them vide partition registered vide document No.476 of 1995 by the first petitioner's grandfather. Thereafter, due to love and affection towards the first petitioner, the second respondent and her husband had executed settlement deed dated 10.03.2008 registered vide document No.971 of 2008 in favour of the first petitioner. After execution of settlement deed, on 26.06.2010 the father of the first petitioner died. After marriage, the first petitioner gave birth to the second and third petitioners and out of love and affection, the first petitioner had executed settlement deed in favour of the second and third petitioners on 24.03.2021 registered vide document No.1559 of 2021. Thereafter, that too after demise of the first petitioner's father, the second respondent made an application under Section 23(1) of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 before the first respondent to cancel the settlement deed executed in favour of the first petitioner, that too in the year 2021. It is also curious to note that when the said application was pending before the first respondent, the second respondent once again settled the very same property in favour of her son by the registered settlement deed dated
W.P.No.2591 of 2022
09.12.2021 registered vide document No.6098 of 2021.
respondent before the first respondent that after demise of her husband, the first petitioner failed to maintain the second respondent by without providing any food. Admittedly, the settlement deed was executed in the year 2008. Further, the second respondent is residing with her son. Only on the instigation of her son, the second respondent lodged complaint before the first respondent and also unilaterally made settlement deed in favour of her son on 09.12.2021 when the first settlement deed was in very much existence. Therefore, it is crystal clear that only on the instigation of the son of the second respondent, the second respondent lodged complaint under Section 23(1) of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 before the first respondent and she is residing with her son. Without considering the same, the first respondent mechanically cancelled the settlement deed which was executed in favour of the first petitioner.
4/7
W.P.No.2591 of 2022
sustained and it is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 10.01.2022 of the first respondent is quashed and this writ petition is allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
06.06.2024 Neutral citation: Yes/No (2/2) Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order lok
The Revenue Divisional Officer cum First Class Executive Magistrate, Kallakurichi Revenue Division, Kallakurichi Town and District
W.P.No.2591 of 2022
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
lok
W.P.No.2591 of 2022
06.06.2024
W.P.No.2591 of 2022
(2/2)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the order cancelling settlement deed executed in favour of the first petitioner under Section 23(1) of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 be sustained.
Whether the first respondent acted mechanically without considering circumstances while cancelling the settlement deed.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mallika
Senthamilselvi
Malathi
The Revenue Divisional Officer cum First Class Executive Magistrate, Kallakurichi
Pappathi
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
