Court Rules That Absence of Express Maintenance Clause in Transfer Deed Does Not Bar Cancellation; Refers Cash Transaction Claims to Income Tax Department
In a significant judgment dated October 14, 2026, the Karnataka High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the cancellation of a release deed executed by a senior citizen in favor of his daughter. The case, Smt Drakshayini @ Girija v. Assistant Commissioner and Sub Divisional Magistrate, Shimoga, revolved around the application of Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 ("Senior Citizens Act"), which empowers authorities to cancel property transfers made under the condition that the transferee would maintain the senior citizen, if such condition is breached.
The petitioner daughter and her husband had sought to overturn the Assistant Commissioner's order that cancelled the release deed executed by the 74-year-old father, contending the transfer was a bona fide sale supported by valid documents including an Agreement of Sale and a receipt for Rs.17.25 lakhs. They argued that the release deed did not contain any clause mandating maintenance, and hence Section 23 could not be invoked.
The Court, however, clarified that an express condition in the release deed requiring the transferee to maintain the senior citizen is not mandatory for invoking Section 23. The critical factor is whether the senior citizen specifically pleads that the transfer was made based on an understanding or agreement that the transferee would provide care and maintenance. The Assistant Commissioner's jurisdiction to examine such claims extends beyond the strict terms of the document to surrounding circumstances.
On examining the facts, the Court found serious discrepancies and doubts regarding the genuineness of the documents relied upon by the petitioners. Notably, the receipt dated August 1, 2023, referenced a Will executed later on August 9, 2023, rendering the receipt suspicious. Furthermore, the receipt indicated that the alleged payment was made to the petitioner's brothers rather than the senior citizen himself, undermining the claim that the release deed was supported by consideration paid to the transferor.
The Court observed the absence of satisfactory evidence demonstrating the financial capacity of the petitioners to pay the claimed amount or proof of actual payment to the senior citizen. Given these inconsistencies and the denial by the senior citizen of receiving any consideration, the Court upheld the Assistant Commissioner's order cancelling the release deed.
The judgment also addressed broader concerns about property transfers by senior citizens to their children or relatives. It urged senior citizens to ensure that any obligation of maintenance or care is clearly recorded in the transfer documents and advised registering authorities to exercise due diligence to ensure elderly persons understand the legal effect of property transactions. The Court suggested that the State Government consider awareness programs and administrative safeguards to better protect senior citizens from potential exploitation.
In line with the Supreme Court's ruling in RBANMS Educational Institution v. B. Gunashekar (2025), where claims of substantial cash payments were involved, the Karnataka High Court directed that the matter be referred to the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Karnataka, for appropriate investigation regarding the alleged cash transactions.
The Court dismissed the writ petition, reinforcing the protective intent of the Senior Citizens Act and underscoring the necessity of scrutinizing property transactions involving senior citizens to prevent their deprivation or neglect.
Bottom Line:
Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 Section 23 For invoking Section 23, it is not necessary that transfer or release deed must expressly contain a condition requiring transferee to maintain senior citizen - If transfer is alleged to have been made on understanding that transferee would take care of senior citizen, authority can examine surrounding circumstances - Where documents relied on by transferee regarding consideration were doubtful and inconsistent, no interference with order cancelling release deed - Matter involving alleged substantial cash payment directed to be referred to Income Tax Department.
Statutory provision(s): Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 Section 23, Registration Act, 1908
