In a sensitive family dispute involving property and parental rights, the Calcutta High Court struck a careful balance upholding the validity of a gift deed in favour of a son while ensuring dignity and protection for his elderly mother.
Background of the Case
The case, Smt. Niva Basu vs. Sri Avishek Basu & Ors., arose from a property transfer made by parents to their son. Later, the mother approached the Maintenance Tribunal, alleging neglect and seeking to declare the transfer void under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.
Read also:- J&K High Court Upholds FCI Officer’s Transfer, Says “No Right to Choose Posting”
The Tribunal had ruled in her favour, declaring the transfer void to the extent of her share and directing the son’s family to vacate her portion of the house.
However, this decision was challenged by the son before a Single Judge, who set aside the Tribunal’s order. The mother then filed an appeal before the Division Bench.
At the outset, the court condoned a delay of 114 days in filing the appeal, taking note of the appellant’s age and medical condition.
“The appellant is a widow and a septuagenarian… the delay has been sufficiently explained,” the bench observed.
Read also:- Supreme Court Flags Unfair Air Force PC Process, Grants Pension Relief to Women Officers
The central issue before the court was whether the gift deed could be declared void under Section 23 of the 2007 Act.
The bench agreed with the earlier finding that the deed did not contain any binding condition requiring the son to maintain his parents.
It noted that merely stating the son was “looking after” the parents does not amount to a legal obligation enforceable under the Act.
Referring to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Sudesh Chhikara vs. Ramti Devi, the court reiterated:
“For Section 23 to apply, the transfer must be subject to a clear condition of providing basic amenities… and there must be failure to do so.”
Read also:- Supreme Court Flags Systemic Bias in Army PC Selection, Sets Aside AFT Findings in Women Officers’ Case
Since no such condition existed in the deed, the legal requirement to invalidate the transfer was not met.
The court also distinguished another Supreme Court judgment cited by the appellant, noting that in that case, a separate written undertaking (vachan patra) existed, clearly binding the son to maintain the parent.
In the present matter, no such document or condition was present.
While upholding the validity of the gift deed, the court acknowledged the broader objective of the law to protect senior citizens.
“The son’s obligation to maintain the mother is irrespective of whether there is any deed of gift or not,” the bench remarked.
Read also:- Transfer U/S 24(5) CPC Can Cure Jurisdiction Defect In Suit: Allahabad High Court
The High Court upheld the Single Judge’s decision but modified the order to secure the mother’s welfare:
- The mother will have the right to reside in the property for the rest of her life.
- The son must provide food, clothing, medicines, and ensure her comfort.
- A monthly amount of ₹2,000 is to be paid as pocket money.
- Local police authorities have been directed to ensure compliance and assist the mother in accessing the premises when required.
The court concluded that the conditions under Section 23 were not satisfied, and therefore, the gift deed could not be declared void. The appeal was disposed of without costs.
Case Details
- Case Title: Smt. Niva Basu vs. Sri Avishek Basu & Ors.
- Case Number: MAT 2272 of 2025
- Judges: Justice Shampa Sarkar, Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta
- Decision Date: 18 March 2026
