Sukhvir Singh and Anr. Vs District Magistrate-Cum-Appellate Authority and Ors.

Aggrieved by the order dated 26.04.2021 passed by the Maintenance Tribunal, whereby the application filed by respondent No.3/senior citizen under Sections 4, 21, and 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 2007”) was allowed, resulting in cancellation of the transfer deed dated 04.07.2011 and the consequent mutation No.2981 entered in favour of the petitioners, who are the son and daughter-in-law of respondent No.3, the petitioners preferred a statutory appeal under Section 16 of the Act of 2007 before the Appellate Tribunal. The Appellate Tribunal, vide order dated 06.09.2022, dismissed the appeal and affirmed the order dated 26.04.2021. Accordingly, the petitioners have instituted the present writ petition challenging the orders ( supra ).

¶15

DEVINDER YADAV 2025.12.11 11:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶16

CWP-23805-2022 (O&M)

¶17

2

¶18

On the previous date of hearing, i.e., 06.11.2025, this Court passed the following order:-

¶19

“1. The present dispute between the son, daughter-in-law, and mother has reached this Court. During the pendency of this writ petition, the relationship between the parties is stated to have improved. In order to bring a quietus to the dispute, the personal appearance of the parties is considered imperative. Accordingly, the petitioners as well as respondent No. 3 are directed to appear personally before this Court on the next date of hearing.

¶20

2. It is expected that both parties shall come forward with their respective proposals for settlement of the dispute, once and for all.

¶21

3. List on 10.12.2025 in the urgent list.

¶22

4. It is made clear that on the next date of hearing, no request for adjournment shall be entertained on behalf of either party, except for strong and compelling reasons.

¶23

5. Interim order to continue till the next date of hearing.”

¶24

In compliance with the directions issued by this Court, both

¶25

the petitioners (petitioner No.2 in person and petitioner No.1 through his attorney, as he resides in England), as well as respondent No.3, are present in Court and have been duly identified by their respective counsel.

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties have amicably resolved their dispute and respondent No.3 is now residing happily with the petitioners under the same roof. Respondent No.3 has also made a categorical statement that she does not wish to pursue the original application filed before the Maintenance Tribunal and has expressed her unequivocal “No Objection” to the present writ petition being allowed and the impugned orders being set aside. She has further affirmed that she is living peacefully and happily with the petitioners and wishes to continue residing with them in the future. She, therefore, states

¶27

DEVINDER YADAV 2025.12.11 11:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶28

CWP-23805-2022 (O&M)

¶29

3

¶30

that the transfer deed and the consequent mutation be restored to their original status.

¶31

The petitioners have also made a statement in consonance with the compromise and have undertaken to take care of respondent No.3 and provide her maintenance in all respects. They further undertake that, in the event of any lapse on their part in providing such maintenance, respondent No.3 shall be at liberty to initiate fresh proceedings under the Act of 2007.

¶32

In view of the amicable settlement arrived at between the parties, the impugned orders are set aside , and the transfer deed along with the consequent mutation is ordered to be restored to its original

¶33

status .

¶34

7. The present writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶35

Pending application also stands disposed of accordingly.

¶36

December	10, 2025	(KU	LDEEP TIWARI) JUDGE
devinder
	Whether speaking/reasoned	:	Yes/No
	Whether Reportable	:	Yes/No

¶37

DEVINDER YADAV 2025.12.11 11:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

Sukhvir Singh and Anr. v. District Magistrate-Cum-Appellate Authority and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sukhvir Singh and Anr. v. District Magistrate-Cum-Appellate Authority and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sukhwinder Singh Vs the Presiding Officer etc.

Satpal Vs Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Ambala, District Ambala and Another

Rama Nand Vs State of Punjab and Others

Geeta Devi @ Geeta Devi Chorsia Vs Additional District Magistrate-Cum-District Magistrate, Amritsar and Others

Chet Ram Vs Presiding Officer Labour Court II

Manohar Singh and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.