W.P(MD)No.11284 of 2023 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 17.07.2026 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI W.P(MD)No.11284 of 2023 and WMP (MD) Nos.9852 and 9854 of 2023 S.Chandran ... Petitioner(s) vs. 1. The District Collector, Virudhunagar. 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sathur, Virudhunagar District. 3. The Sub Registrar, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District. 4.S.Ayyasami 5.M.Kamala ... Respondent(s) PRAYER : Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to 1/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.11284 of 2023 the impugned proceedings in Ni.Mu.A1/2358/2019 dated 25.10.2021 by the second respondent herein and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.VR.Shanmuganathan For R1 to R3 : Mr.M.Mahaboob Athiff, Counsel for State For R4 & R5 : Mr.M.Thirunavukkarasu O R D E R Aggrieved by the cancellation order dated 25.10.2021 passed by the second respondent, whereby the registered settlement deed executed by the third respondent in favour of the petitioner was cancelled, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition challenging the said order. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner’s father executed a registered settlement deed dated 02.08.2017 in favour of the petitioner’s brother (fourth respondent). Thereafter, the fourth respondent executed a registered family arrangement-cum-gift deed dated 21.08.2018, settling half share of the property in favour of the petitioner, thereby conferring independent title upon him. Subsequently, the father initiated proceedings under the Maintenance and 2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.11284 of 2023 Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, seeking cancellation of the settlement deed. Thereafter, the father of the petitioner passed away on 26.12.2022. No notice was issued to the petitioner, despite his being a beneficiary under the subsequent settlement deed and a person directly affected by the proposed cancellation. Without affording him an opportunity of hearing, the second respondent, by order dated 25.10.2021, directed cancellation of the settlement deed not only the father’s settlement deed in favour of the fourth respondent but also the subsequent settlement deed executed by the fourth respondent in favour of the petitioner. Challenging the said order, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the authorities under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, have jurisdiction under Section 23 only in respect of transfers by way of gift or settlement, where the transfer is subject to a condition that the transferee shall provide basic amenities and physical needs to the transferor. In the present case, the document in question is a settlement deed without any such conditional clause. Therefore, the provisions of Section 23 of the Act are wholly inapplicable 3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.11284 of 2023 and the second respondent has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint or direct cancellation of the settlement deed. 4. Placing reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Full Bench in the case of Sasikala v. Revenue Divisional Officer and another reported in 2022 SCC online Mad 4343, the learned counsel submitted that, it was categorically held that in the absence of a condition incorporated in the deed, the power under Section 23(1) cannot be exercised and further held that when a settlement deed is executed, the same cannot be cancelled unilaterally. Therefore, the impugned order dated 20.01.2021 is wholly without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed. 5. The learned Counsel for the State appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 would fairly submit that the registered settlement deed in question does not contain any specific condition obligating the petitioner to provide basic amenities and physical needs to the petitioner's father. In the absence of such a condition incorporated in the document of transfer, the provisions of Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, would not be attracted. 4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.11284 of 2023 6. This Court has carefully considered the submissions on either side and perused the materials placed on record. 7. Admittedly, the issue is no longer res integra. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sudesh Chhikara v. Ramti Devi and another, reported in (2024) 14 SCC 225, has held that the deeming fiction under Section 23(1) of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, can be invoked only when the transfer is made subject to the condition that the transferee shall provide the basic amenities and physical needs to the transferor and the transferee fails to fulfil such condition. Unless such a condition is expressly incorporated in the document of transfer, the jurisdiction under Section 23 cannot be exercised for declaring the transfer void. The Supreme Court further held that the authorities constituted under the Act cannot assume jurisdiction to annul a transfer in the absence of the statutory requirements contemplated under Section 23. 8. Coming to the facts of the present case, admittedly, the document in question is a registered settlement deed and there is no recital therein imposing 5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.11284 of 2023 any obligation upon the petitioner to provide basic amenities and physical needs to the third respondent. Therefore, the essential requirement for invoking Section 23 of the Act is absent. Consequently, the second respondent had no jurisdiction to direct cancellation of the registered settlement deed by invoking the provisions of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. Accordingly, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the same is set aside. 9. Accordingly, this writ petition stands allowed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 17.07.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes PKN 6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.11284 of 2023 To 1. The District Collector, Virudhunagar. 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sathur, Virudhunagar District. 3. The Sub Registrar, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District. 7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.11284 of 2023 M.DHANDAPANI ,J. PKN ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No.11284 of 2023 DATED : 17.07.2026 8/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis