BENGALURU: The High Court of Karnataka has said that the obligation to look after their aged parents becomes more binding when children have taken their property by way of gift. A division bench of Chief Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Krishna S Dixit stated this while passing an order dismissing an appeal by Kavitha R and her husband Yogesh, residents of Basavapattana in Gubbi taluk of Tumakuru district.
The petitioners questioned the single judge’s order passed on September 10, 2021, dismissing their petition against the assistant commissioner’s order issued on February 24, 2021, cancelling the gift deed executed on February 28, 2018, by Kavitha’s parents.
The division bench said, “We decline indulgence in the matter broadly agreeing with the reasoning of the single judge...The liability to look after the aged father and mother is not a matter of charity, but a statutory obligation.”
The court said several socio-welfare laws, especially the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, mandate that children respect and look after their aged parents. In this case, the parents were not only not looked after but also manhandled.
That too by children who have taken the gift of their parents’ property. “We also note that many cases of harassment of parents do not come to light at all for obvious reasons. This court has been observing several such cases coming before it. This is not an acceptable development. The courts, authorities and tribunals have to be extra vigilant and strict too on matters like this,” the court said.
Nirmal and Rajashekaraiah gave the property owned by them to their daughter Kavitha by way of a gift in 2018. One of the conditions in the gift deed is that Kavitha should take care of her parents. However, Kavitha and her husband assaulted Nirmal and Rajashekaraiah and drove them out of their house.
Rajashekaraiah had petitioned the assistant commissioner alleging that Kavitha and her husband were forcing him to sell the land to clear their debts. The assistant commissioner cancelled the gift deed, which was challenged by Kavitha and her husband before a single judge, who also rejected their petition.
The appellants argued before the division bench that they had been looking after their parents well.