A GPA Holder Cannot Claim Eviction Under Senior Citizens Act Without Legal Ownership: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Eviction Order Against Daughter

“Power of Attorney Does Not Confer Ownership” — In a significant judgment the Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled that a General Power of Attorney (GPA) holder cannot claim ownership or seek eviction under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 without a registered deed of conveyance. The Court, in Harjit Kaur v. Union Territory of Chandigarh & Ors., allowed the writ petition filed by a daughter who was ordered to vacate her father’s claimed property, setting aside the eviction order as being beyond the jurisdiction of the authorities under the 2007 Act.

The Court held: “The power of attorney and the agreement to sell, even if the same are irrevocable, do not create title or interest in the property.”

The dispute centered around House No. 3100, Sector 40-D, Chandigarh, where the petitioner, Harjit Kaur (daughter), was residing. Her father, Gulshan Beer Singh (respondent no. 2), a senior citizen, had filed an application under Sections 21 and 22 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, seeking eviction of his daughter from the house.

He claimed to have an irrevocable power of attorney and an agreement to sell in his favour executed by the recorded owner, Bilhar Singh, and thus asserted possession rights over the property under the 2007 Act.

The District Magistrate allowed the eviction on April 7, 2016, directing the daughter to vacate the portion she occupied and remove CCTV cameras from the premises. This order was challenged before the High Court.

The key legal issue was whether a senior citizen who is not the legal owner of a property, but merely a power of attorney holder, can seek eviction under the 2007 Act.

The Court referred to the recent Supreme Court judgment in M.S. Ananthamurthy v. J. Manjula (Civil Appeal Nos. 3266–3267 of 2025), which reaffirmed the earlier law laid down in Suraj Lamp & Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Haryana, stating: “An agreement to sell does not meet the requirements of Sections 54 and 55 of the Transfer of Property Act to effectuate a ‘transfer’. Such transactions do not convey title and do not amount to a valid mode of transfer.”

The High Court observed: “The respondent No.2-senior citizen not being the owner of the property in question as of now, cannot seek the eviction of petitioner No.1 from the premises of the property in question.”

“The direction… is without jurisdiction and [ignores] the provisions of the 2007 Act which only creates a right with the senior citizen qua the property being owned by them and transferred to the children or relatives without any consideration.”

It clarified that any claim based on GPA or sale agreement must be asserted in a civil court and not under the summary jurisdiction provided under the 2007 Act.

Setting aside the District Magistrate’s order dated 07.04.2016, the High Court held: “In case the possession of the property is to be sought by the respondent No.2-senior citizen being the holder of the power of attorney… he has to avail the remedy under the Civil Court and not under 2007 Act.”

The writ petition was accordingly allowed, with liberty to the father to approach the appropriate forum if he seeks possession as GPA holder.

This ruling sets a clear precedent that mere possession of an irrevocable power of attorney and an agreement to sell is not sufficient to claim ownership rights or seek eviction of a family member under the 2007 Act. It reiterates the long-settled legal position that ownership can only be transferred through a registered conveyance deed, and any dispute arising from GPA-based claims must be resolved through regular civil proceedings.

Date of Decision: 18 March 2025