Urmila Dixit v. Sunil Sharan Dixit: Senior Citizens' Right to Reclaim Transferred Property

Introduction

In Urmila Dixit v. Sunil Sharan Dixit (2025 INSC 20), the Supreme Court addressed the crucial question of whether senior citizens can reclaim property transferred to children who fail to maintain them.

Facts

A mother executed a Gift Deed in favour of her son with a condition that he would maintain her. A promissory note stated that if the son failed to care for the parents, the mother could take back the property. When the son allegedly attacked the mother regarding further property transfer, she sought cancellation under Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.

Key Holdings

Justice Sanjay Karol held that:

• Liberal Interpretation: The Act is beneficial legislation aimed at securing rights of senior citizens and must be given liberal meaning
• Section 23 Application: Two ingredients required - transfer with maintenance condition, and failure to provide such maintenance
• Eviction Power: Authorities under Section 23 can order eviction and grant possession to senior citizens

Constitutional Foundation

The Court emphasized that maintaining parents is both a social obligation and constitutional imperative, advancing the cause of social justice.