Delhi High Court: In a petition filed by Charanjit Singh Ahluwalia (petitioner), a senior citizen of 97 years age is challenging the constitutional validity of Section of the (‘Senior Citizens Act’) whereby it restricts the applicability of the Section only to the gifts of property made by a senior citizen after the commencement of the Senior Citizens Act. A division bench of Satish Chandra Sharma, CJ. and Subramonium Prasad, J., held that the present case is not fit for exercising its jurisdiction under Article of the .
The petitioner is a senior citizen who was allotted property at Lajpat Nagar vide deed of conveyance and he claimed that two out of his four sons and four daughters fraudulently got gift deeds signed by the petitioner in their favour. The gifted property was a source of income for the petitioner and after the gift deed was executed, the rentals received were appropriated by his two children to whom the properties were gifted. However, the petitioner stated that he was manhandled and tortured by his two sons, the petitioner being 97 years of age, is also infirm and heartbroken and scared of his two sons to file any complaint with the Police. Thus, he seeks to revoke the gifts which were made in favour of his two sons.
Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Section goes against the object and purpose of the Act to protect Senior Citizens as the senior citizens who have gifted their properties to their children or near and dear ones with the hope that they will be taken care of by them, are not being maintained by the persons to whom the property has been gifted, rather they are being tortured and abused. Thus, in such a scenario, the Act must be read in a manner to permit the senior citizens to revoke the gifts made by them prior to the commencement of the Act.
The issue under consideration is that the petitioner wants the words “after the commencement of the Act” to be taken away or struck down from Section of the because Section of the is read-only prospectively.
Placing reliance on Human Rights and Social Welfare Forum v. Union of India, , the Court noted that the Act did not intend to disturb the rights of the donee which has already been created and vested in him. The Legislature is conscious of the fact that the vested rights of the donor are not to be given a retrospective operation despite the fact that the object of the Act is to provide for measures for the welfare of senior citizens.
Thus, the Court dismissed the petition and held that the petitioner must approach the competent authority under the Senior Citizens Act.
[Charanjit Singh Ahluwalia v Union of India, W.P.(C) 12076 of 2022, decided on 12-05-2023]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Mr. Sudarshan Rajan, Mr. Hitain Bajaj, Advocates for the Petitioner;
Mr. Ravi Prakash, Mr. Farman Ali, Ms. Astu Khandelwal, Advocates for the Respondent.
The post appeared first on .