Question

In which case, the Supreme Court has upheld the rights of senior citizens to reclaim property under Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007?

• A. Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma (2020)
• B. Harsh Bubna & Anr. v. Suryaprakash Bubna and Anr. (2025)
• C. Urmila Dixit v. Sunil Sharan Dixit (2025)
• D. Supriyo @ Supriya Chakraborty & Anr v. Union of India (2023)

Hint:

Section 23 of the Senior Citizens Act allows elderly parents to take back property they have gifted to their children if the children fail to take care of them.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is C

This question refers to a hypothetical case set in 2025 to test the understanding of a key legal provision.
Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, is a powerful tool for senior citizens.
It allows them to have a transfer of property (e.
g.
, a gift or sale) declared void by a Maintenance Tribunal under specific circumstances.
The condition is that the transfer was made with the understanding that the person receiving the property (the transferee) would provide for the basic amenities and physical needs of the senior citizen, but the transferee has failed or refused to do so.
In the hypothetical case of Urmila Dixit v.
Sunil Sharan Dixit, the court would uphold this right, affirming that a senior citizen's right to a peaceful life and maintenance can lead to the cancellation of a property transfer if the underlying condition of care is breached.