Parents & Senior Citizens Act - Maintenance Tribunal Has Power To Order Eviction & Transfer Of Possession : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has clarified that a Tribunal under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 has the power to order the eviction and transfer of possession.

Without such a power, the objectives of the 2007 Act - which are to grant speedy, simple and inexpensive remedies to elderly citizens- would be defeated, the Court said.

A bench comprising Justice CT Ravikumar and Justice Sanjay Karol was deciding an appeal filed by a mother seeking to annul a gift deed executed in favour of her son in 2019. The mother complained that the son was not looking after her and hence, the gift deed was liable to be cancelled as per Section 23 of the Act, since the conveyance was made subject to the condition of providing maintenance.  Though the Tribunal set aside the gift deed and a single judge of the Madhya Pradesh High Court affirmed the same, a division bench of the High Court, in son's appeal, reversed the Tribunal's decision.

The Supreme Court disapproved of the reasoning of the division bench that Section 23 was a standalone provision and the Tribunal had no power to transfer possession. 

The judgment authored by Justice Karol stated : 

"..we must clarify the observations made vide the impugned order qua the competency of the Tribunal to hand over possession of the property. In S. Vanitha (supra), this Court observed that Tribunals under the Act may order eviction if it is necessary and expedient to ensure the protection of the senior citizen. Therefore, it cannot be said that the Tribunals constituted under the Act, while exercising jurisdiction under Section 23, cannot order possession to be transferred. This would defeat the purpose and object of the Act, which is to provide speedy, simple and inexpensive remedies for the elderly."

Reference was made to the judgment in S. Vanitha v. Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru Urban District and Ors (2021). The judgment also noted that as held in Sudesh Chhikara vs Ramti Devi (2022), the power under Section 23 can be exercised if the transfer was subject to the condition of providing maintenance. Quoting from Sudhesh, the judgment summarised the conditions to invoke Section 23 :

(a) The transfer must have been made subject to the condition that the transferee shall provide the basic amenities and basic physical needs to the transferor; and

(b) The transferee refuses or fails to provide such amenities and physical needs to the transferor.

The Court held that both conditions were met in the instant case. Also, the Court advocated for a liberal view of the provisions, considering that the Act was a beneficial one.

"Another observation of the High Court that must be clarified, is Section 23 being a standalone provision of the Act. In our considered view, the relief available to senior citizens under Section 23 is intrinsically linked with the statement of objects and reasons of the Act, that elderly citizens of our country, in some cases, are not being looked after. It is directly in furtherance of the objectives of the Act and empowers senior citizens to secure their rights promptly when they transfer a property subject to the condition of being maintained by the transferee," the Court observed.

The appeal was allowed.

Senior Advocate V Mohana and AoR Dr. Sarvam Ritam Khare appeared for the appellant; Senior Advocate Madhavi Divan for the respondent.

Case : Urmila Dixit v Sunil Sharan Dixit and others

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 3

Click here to read the judgment