Madras High Court· 23 July 2026
When can a settlement deed be cancelled under s.23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007?
A.Ragulraj v. The District Collector, Dindigul, Dindigul District
W.P(MD)No.16028 of 2024 · W.P(MD)No.16028 of 2024
Coram: Justice M.Dhandapani
Answer
Only where the transfer was made subject to a condition requiring the transferee to provide the transferor with basic amenities and basic physical needs. The Full Bench in Sasikala v. Revenue Divisional Officer held that where the settlor has imposed no such condition there is no scope for invoking s.23; an absolute and irrevocable settlement, executed out of love and affection and reserving no right of revocation, does not attract the section.
Headnote
Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 — s.23 — Settlement deed — Cancellation — Condition to provide basic amenities — Subsequent purchaser —
Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 — s.23 — Condition of maintenance is the jurisdictional fact —
Held: A settlement deed cannot be cancelled under s.23 unless the transfer was made subject to a condition requiring the transferee to provide the transferor with basic amenities and basic physical needs. (¶5)
Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 — s.23 — Absolute and irrevocable deed — No jurisdiction to cancel —
Held further: Where the deed is absolute and irrevocable and reserves no right to revoke for failure to maintain, the essential ingredients are absent and the authority has no jurisdiction to cancel it. (¶7, ¶9)
Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 — Obligation to maintain survives — Registered sale deed not to be disturbed —
Held further: Setting aside the cancellation does not absolve the transferee of his statutory and moral obligation to maintain his aged mother, who may work out other remedies; the subsequent purchaser's registered Sale Deed is not to be interfered with. Writ petition allowed. (¶9, ¶10)
In the Court's own words
Paragraph 5The issue involved in the present Writ Petition is no longer res integra. The Hon'ble Full Bench of this Court in Sasikala v. Revenue Divisional Officer and another, reported in 2022 SCC OnLine Mad 4343, has categorically held that a settlement deed cannot be cancelled under Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, unless the transfer is made subject to a condition requiring the transferee to provide the transferor with basic amenities and basic physical needs. The relevant observations are extracted below: "46. The writ petition in W.P.(MD) No.6889 of 2020 is filed by the daughter of the second respondent to quash the order passed by the first respondent under Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. The gift deed executed by the second respondent in favour of the writ petitioner was unilaterally cancelled by the second respondent father. The settlement deed dated 06.03.2015 is irrevocable and was executed out of love and affection. The second respondent has specifically stated that he has no right to revoke the settlement deed. From the recitals, the settlement does not attract Section 126 of the Transfer of Property Act. It is seen that the settlor has not imposed any condition requiring the transferee to provide basic amenities and physical needs. Therefore, there is no scope for invoking Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. Consequently, the impugned order is liable to be quashed."
Paragraph 7In the present case, the Settlement Deed executed by the seventh respondent in favour of the eighth respondent is an absolute and irrevocable settlement deed. A careful reading of the recitals shows that the document does not contain any condition obligating the eighth respondent to maintain the seventh respondent or provide her with basic amenities and basic physical needs. Nor does it reserve any right in favour of the settlor to revoke or cancel the settlement in the event of failure to maintain her. Therefore, the essential ingredients required for invoking Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, are absent.
Acts & Sections
s.23 Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007s.126 Transfer of Property Act, 1882One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.
Read the full text of A.Ragulraj v. The District Collector, Dindigul, Dindigul District — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.
Create my free accountFree forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India
Open the full judgment →