Can't reclaim property from daughter-in-law after son’s death: HC

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that a senior citizen, who transferred property to son, cannot claim it back from the daughter-in-law after his death under the provisions of the senior citizens Act.

In a significant ruling with wider implications for property disputes within families, Justice Harsimran Singh Sethi held that the senior citizen cannot invoke the provisions of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, to reclaim property from a daughter-in-law, where the land was originally transferred to her now-deceased husband.

The ruling came in a case where the petitioner-daughter-in-law was seeking the setting aside of an order dated November 25, 2021, cancelling the transfer deeds.

The daughter-in-law submitted that the senior citizen transferred the land in her husband’s favour, but unfortunately he died and the property devolved upon the petitioner and her children after his death. The senior citizen filed a petition under the 2007 Act and the appellate authority envisaged under the 2007 Act passed the impugned order cancelling the transfer deed without appreciating the provisions of law, she contended.

Justice Sethi held that the authorities failed to consider a fundamental limitation of the law — the definition of "children" under the Act did not include a daughter-in-law. “The 2007 Act has been framed with a clear intent that the daughter-in-law is not to be brought into picture for getting the relief under the 2007 Act,” he said.

Referring to the approach adopted by the authorities in cancelling the property transfer, Justice Sethi said: “The proceedings were initiated under the 2007 Act by the senior citizen after the death of her son, who had already transferred the property in favour of the petitioner-daughter-in-law. That being so, the appellate authority exercising jurisdiction under the 2007 Act should have ensured whether, the daughter-in-law could be brought under the purview of the 2007 Act so as to claim the land in question back on the ground that petitioner-daughter-in-law was not maintaining the respondent-senior citizen. The authorities concerned have not appreciated the said aspect at all”.

Allowing the petition, Justice Sethi asserted that the order passed by the authorities concerned could not be sustained in the eyes of law and was accordingly set aside.