In a case which helped send a positive message, the Bombay High Court recently upheld the Senior Citizens Maintenance Tribunal’s decision to revoke two gift deeds of an older woman to her son after he denied her access to her house.

While delivering the verdict, Justice Sandeep V. Marne observed that denying access to one’s house is a denial of basic amenities.  

According to LiveLaw on Tuesday, Urvashi Khater executed two gift deeds in her son’s favour a few years ago when her husband was receiving treatment at a hospital. But after her husband’s death, she was denied access to her house, where she had lived for 30 years.  

“The gifts were executed out of natural love and affection towards the son, which was the only possible consideration for execution thereof. Inbuilt in such love and affection is the duty of the son to provide basic amenities and physical needs to the widowed mother. The events that have occurred post-execution of gift deeds indicate that such love and affection between the mother and son no longer exists. Along with love and affection, the son has perhaps failed to perform the duty of providing the basic amenities and physical needs to his mother. It was never (the) son’s property. He had no right to seek gift thereof,” the court observed, LiveLaw reported.

In this context, knowing what a gift deed is and what you can do if facing such a dreadful situation is critical. A gift deed is a legal document between the transferor and the transferee or the gift giver and the receiver. The gift deed transfers the ownership of a property, movable or immovable, from one person to another without any cash transactions involved. 

In her case filed under various sections of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, she alleged that her son abused her, personal belongings were removed from her room without consent, and forced her to stay in a rented house after her husband’s death. 

The tribunal ordered the revocation of the two gift deeds to give her access to her house. However, it didn’t grant her other prayers, monthly maintenance and medical expenses. Later, her son and his wife challenged the decision in the High Court, which dismissed their petition.

The court said: “This may not be an irreversible situation in every case. Mother’s love and affection can be won back. At the moment, however, the extreme measure of restoration of gifted properties to mother, in my view, was warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case”.

In Khater’s case, she got relief from the court; however, legal battles are not something everyone likes to get into. So, here are the key lessons from the case to remember.

• Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act says that the transfer of property as a gift can be declared void if the transfer was done by fraud, coercion, and undue influence. It is also subject to the condition that the transferee will provide basic amenities to the transferor (senior citizen). In this case, the transferee refused to do so.  

• The conditions of taking care of the transferor need not be mentioned explicitly in the deed. It can be established or cited in the tribunal that there were assurances from the transferee that they would take care of the transferor. 

• The petitioner can provide oral evidence before the tribunal, but it is not mandatory in every case, mainly if there is sufficient material showing the existing conditions and the pleading is specific. 

• The term’ maintenance’ is not only about giving money. It also includes providing other amenities like food, clothing, medical care, treatment, and residence.

• The documents should support the allegation. The mental and physical torture findings by the tribunal court were based on her (the old lady’s) circumstances, where she was denied access to the house she has been living in for the last 30 years and had an emotional connection with it. 

•  As it is common in our country where parents transfer their property to their children out of love and affection, there may be cases where one may need to knock at the court’s door to get back one’s belongings and property. So, be prudent while entering into any legally binding document. It may cause unintended repercussions.