Please do not repeat a question. I have already answered your same question at Section 23 of maintenance and senior citizen act 2007. In case of a doubt, do not ask duplicate question and raise your query in the same previous question.
As I have already said, it is seen from the language of Section 23 of the said Act that it is applicable where a senior citizen has transferred his property by way of gift or otherwise. In your case, when the property was transferred by the younger brother, he was not a senior citizen since at that time he was 56 years old. Therefore, it appears that Section 23 may not be applicable. However, the courts may sometimes view it as a beneficial provision to the senior citizens and take a liberal view (to the effect that the property could have been transferred even prior to becoming a senior citizen), more so, because now you have specifically said that the property was transferred by way of a gift and that there was a condition too that the transferor had a right to cancel the deed if the transferee does not maintain him. There is also another complication in that the transferee (the elder brother) is himself a senior citizen.
So, ultimately, the question also involves detailed examination of facts, which is not possible on a forum as documents are not examined in detail while answering questions. But, I have tried to highlight the issues that may be relevant to your matter. It will ultimately depend on the interpretation given by the court, more so, in the facts of the case. On your part, you can take a stand (on behalf of the transferee, who is the elder brother) that Section 23 is not applicable for the reasons mentioned above.
Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.
.
