Electricity Act 2003 | Section 56(2) Does Not Preclude Licensee From Raising Supplementary Demand After Two Years; Only Restricts Right To Disconnect: Supreme Court Dissolution Of Partnership At Will | Outgoing Partner Entitled To Market Value Of Assets As On Date Of Distribution, Not Date Of Dissolution: Supreme Court SEBI | Release Of Escrow Under Buyback Regulations Does Not Preclude Independent Inquiry Into Fraud Under PFUTP Regulations: Supreme Court Promotion Based On Merit Does Not Wipe Out Past Adverse Records But Must Be Balanced In FR 56(j) Compulsory Retirement: Supreme Court Appellate Court Can Convict For Offence Even If Charge Not Framed By Trial Court Under Section 464 CrPC: Supreme Court Extradition | Sovereign Assurance Does Not Override Judicial Sentencing; Cannot Be Used To Artificially Accelerate Sentence Completion: Supreme Court Article 21 | State Has A Positive Duty To Protect Public Health By Implementing Front-Of-Package Labelling Regulations: Supreme Court Revenue Entries Are Not Documents Of Title, Cannot Replace Substantive Evidence In Property Disputes: Supreme Court Long Possession Without Hostile Animus Does Not Amount To Adverse Possession: Supreme Court Administrative Discretion Must Comply With Article 14; Subsequent Executive Decisions Cannot Retroactively Cure Failure Of Timely Performance: Supreme Court Municipal Corporation Cannot Unilaterally Downgrade Market Value Of Land Acquired For Road Widening To Deny TDR Certificates: Andhra Pradesh High Court Execution Of Agreement To Sell Does Not Automatically Terminate Existing Tenancy: Allahabad High Court Writ Jurisdiction Not Maintainable When Title To Property Is Under A Cloud And Subject Matter Of Disputed Facts: Andhra Pradesh High Court Amendment Of Plaint Seeking Impleadment Of Third Parties And Addition Of Time-Barred Claims In A Partition Suit Cannot Be Permitted: Bombay High Court Reassessment Order Does Not Result In Merger Of Original Assessment Order If Issues Are Distinct: Andhra Pradesh High Court GST Assessment Order Uploaded Only Under 'Additional Notices' Tab Without Separate Intimation Violates Principles Of Natural Justice: Calcutta High Court 'Prolonged Inaction' Cannot Be Rewarded: Delhi High Court Upholds CESTAT Refusal To Condone 968-Day Delay In Filing Customs Appeal Probate No Longer Mandatory To Establish Rights Under A Will Following 2025 Amendment To Indian Succession Act: J&K High Court Review Jurisdiction Cannot Be Used To Introduce New Factual Foundations Or Reopen Concluded Arbitral Awards: Karnataka High Court High Court Cannot Invoke Article 227 To Strike Off Plaint When Statutory Remedy Under Order VII Rule 11 CPC Is Available: Madras High Court Section 58 BNSS | Detention Beyond 24 Hours Without Magistrate’s Authority Vitiates Arrest And Subsequent Remand: Orissa High Court Arbitrator Is The Sole Judge Of Quality And Quantity Of Evidence, Court Cannot Act As Court Of Appeal: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 5 Limitation Act | Court Cannot Condone Delay In A Mechanical Manner Without Ascertaining Bona Fides Of The Applicant: Calcutta High Court High Court Cannot Quash FIR Under Section 482 CrPC By Conducting Mini-Trial On Merits: Punjab & Haryana High Court Taxation Law | Mere Assertion Of Natural Justice Violation On Disputed Facts Won't Bypass Statutory Appeal: Delhi High Court

”As senior citizen’s right to seek benefit under the special statute abates on his/her death.” – PH HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh delivered its verdict in the case of Gurdeep Singh and others vs. Sub Divisional Magistrate-cum-Presiding Officer and another (LPA-2402-2017), upholding the decision of the Tribunal and rejecting the petition filed by the appellants.

”Transfer in favour of the ward is made with the pious hope that the transferee would continue to serve the parents as he was doing prior to execution of the document.”

The High Court bench comprising of Hon’ble Ms. Justice Jaishree Thakur and Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Sukhvinder Kaur pronounced the judgement on July 21, 2023, after considering the arguments presented by the parties’ respective advocates.

The case revolved around the cancellation of a transfer deed executed under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizen Act, 2007. The appellants, represented by Mr. G.S. Punia and Ms. Jagriti Kalia, challenged the order of the learned Single Judge who had upheld the Tribunal’s decision declaring the transfer deed void.

The crux of the dispute lay in the contention by respondent No.2, Nand Singh, that his son, petitioner No.1, had taken advantage of his illiteracy and transferred land to himself with the assurance of taking care of him. However, petitioner No.1 allegedly failed to provide the necessary maintenance and amenities, leading to the cancellation of the transfer deed.

”Legal heirs are given liberty to avail civil remedy available under law.”

In a crucial turn of events, the Court observed that respondent No.2, at whose instance the Maintenance/Appellate Tribunal had passed the impugned order, had since passed away, rendering the proceedings infructuous. The legal heirs were granted the liberty to pursue civil remedies available under the law, allowing them to challenge the transfer deed in question.

This landmark ruling sheds light on the complexities of intergenerational property transfers and sets a precedent for future cases under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizen Act, 2007.

 

 Date of Decision: 21st July 2023

Gurdeep Singh and others  vs Sub Divisional Magistrate-cum-Presiding Officer and another 

Latest Legal News