Disposed¶43

Saranya v. The District Collector

Madras HC8 Apr 2026WP(MD)/293/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gift deed cancellation; Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007; District Collector Theni appellate order; Sub Collector maintenance award Rs.17,000/- per month; mediation and conciliation settlement; lump sum Rs. 50,00,000/- in lieu of maintenance; conditional setting aside of impugned order; revival clause on payment default; W.P.(MD)No.293 of 2026; W.M.P.(MD)No.292 of 2026 closed; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; Hemant Chandangoudar J.; decision dated 08.04.2026.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 26.11.2025 passed by the first respondent set aside, subject to the petitioner paying Rs. 50,00,000/- to the third respondent within four months from receipt of a copy of the order; on default, the third respondent may revive the writ petition. No order as to costs; connected miscellaneous petition closed.

Saranya Vs The District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶43

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 26.11.2025 passed by the first respondent (District Collector) cancelling the gift deed executed by the third respondent in favour of the petitioner is liable to be quashed. +1 more

¶20

Court's answer

In light of the settlement arrived at between the parties, the impugned order dated 26.11.2025 passed by the first respondent is set aside, subject to the condition that the petitioner pays Rs. 50,00,000/- to the third respondent within four months from receipt of a copy of the order; in the event of default, it is open to the third respondent to revive the writ petition.

¶43

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition stands disposed of with no order as to costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶47

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (Art. 226, Certiorari) by a daughter challenging the District Collector, Theni's order dated 26.11.2025 cancelling the gift deed executed by her father (third respondent) over Edamal Street property, Theni Town; the father had earlier sought cancellation before the Sub Collector under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, where he was awarded Rs.17,000/- per month, and succeeded on appeal before the District Collector. On reference to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, the parties settled: petitioner to pay Rs.50,00,000/- towards full and final settlement upon sale of the gifted property, with the respondent to hand over cheques and title deeds, settle pending civil/criminal matters, disclaim liability for his personal debts, and forgo future maintenance claims. Held: impugned order set aside subject to payment of Rs.50,00,000/- within four months, failing which the third respondent may revive the writ petition; writ petition disposed of, no costs, connected W.M.P.(MD)No.292 of 2026 closed.

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.293 of 2026

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 08.04.2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.293 of 2026 and W.M.P.(MD)No.292 of 2026

Saranya

... Petitioner

vs.

1.The District Collector, Theni District, Theni.

¶11

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer / Sub Collector, Periyakulam, Theni District.

¶12

3.S.Anthonyraj ... Respondents

¶13

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the 1^st respondent herein in his proceedings in Na.Ka.No. 3296/A1/2025, dated 26.11.2025 and quash the same.

¶14

For Petitioner :Mr.P.Sivachandran For R1 and R2 :Mr.S.Kameswaran Government Advocate *****

¶15

1/6

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

W.P.(MD)No.293 of 2026

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

The petitioner, who is the daughter of the third respondent,

¶20

challenges the order dated 26.11.2025 passed by the first respondent, whereby the gift deed executed by the third respondent in favour of the petitioner was cancelled.

¶21

The matter was referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre attached to this Bench to explore the possibility of an amicable settlement. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner and the third respondent have resolved their disputes and entered into a settlement agreement before the

¶22

Mediation Centre.

¶23

The terms of the settlement agreement arrived at between the

¶24

parties are as follows:

¶25

“ Petitioner is the only daughter of the Respondent. Petitioner got married to one Janakiraman who is now working in abroad and she is residing with her husband and family.

¶26

Respondent purchased a property in Edamal Street, Theni Town in his name from the income of the petitioner's husband Mr. Janakiraman. Respondent also gifted the above property to the petitioner.

¶27

2/6

¶28

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶29

W.P.(MD)No.293 of 2026

¶30

Respondent challenged the gift deed under maintenance and welfare of parents and senior citizen Act, 2007, seeking to cancel the gift deed before Sub Collector and the same was partly allowed to pay Rs:17000/- per month. Against the said order the Respondent preferred an appeal before the District Collector and the same was allowed by canceling the gift deed.

¶31

The said order was challenged by the petitioner before this Hon'ble Court and the same was referred to the mediation center.

¶32

1) The Writ Petitioner agreed to settle the Respondent a sum of Rs:50,00,000/- (Rupees: Fifty Lakhs Only) after selling the Edamal Street Property(Gift Property) within 4 months from the date of the receipt of the copy of the writ order from this Hon'ble Court.

¶33

2) Respondent also agreed to handover the cheques and House Property deed in the name of the petitioner's husband and to settle the civil and criminal cases which were pending before the Rajapalayam Sub Court and Thenkarai Police Station, Periyakulam.

¶34

3)Further the Respondent assures that petitioner is not liable for any personal debt belongs to the Respondent and his wife herein after or in future.

¶35

4) Respondent also agreed that he has no connection in future with the properties belong to the petitioner and her husband.

¶36

5) Further the respondent also agreed that he has no right in future to claim any maintenance.

¶37

6) Further more the petitioner and the respondent no longer have any material possessions, except for yours.

¶38

3/6

¶39

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶40

W.P.(MD)No.293 of 2026

¶41

7. By signing this Agreement the parties hereto state that they have no further claims or demands against each other with respect to W.P. No. 293/2026 and all disputes and differences in this regard have been amicably settled by the parties hereto through the process of Conciliation / Mediation.”

¶42

In terms of the settlement agreement, the petitioner has agreed to pay a sum of Rs.50,00,000/- to the third respondent towards full and final settlement of the claim, upon sale of the subject property.

¶43

In light of the settlement arrived at between the parties, the impugned order dated 26.11.2025 passed by the first respondent is set aside, subject to the condition that the petitioner pays a sum of Rs. 50,00,000/- to the third respondent within a period of four (4) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In the event of default in payment within the stipulated time, it is open to the third respondent to revive this writ petition.

¶44

4/6

¶45

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶46

W.P.(MD)No.293 of 2026

¶47