The Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007: Safeguarding Elderly Rights in India

16th January, 2025 - 9:13 am Categories: Patent Act 0 Comments

Introduction

Parents and senior citizens have always been an integral part of our lives. But, in the modern era, we have often seen a shift from traditional family structure to nuclear family structure whereby the elders are left alone or neglected. While traditionally, the elders used to rely on the younger generation or the children or grandchildren for support, it has now become more complex than before as families are nuclear and living separately and independently. To cure this neglect and lack of responsibility, the legislation found it necessary to implement The Maintenance of Parents and Welfare of Senior Citizens Act, 2007.

Background

The senior citizen act defines children as son, daughter as well as grandchildren but the same should not be a minor. The definition clause further states that in case of childless senior citizen, the relatives who are to inherit the property will look after the maintenance. Section 4 clearly states that it is the obligation of the children to maintain the senior citizens and make them lead the normal life as much as possible[1]. While what all entails a normal life is not defined in the section, the definition clause does states that welfare and maintenance include food, health care, residence and recreational activities.

Section 23 talks about protection of property of senior citizen which means that if a property is being transferred to someone the it becomes the responsibility of that person to look after the senior citizen of that property[2]. Now, this in itself comes with a jurisprudential question whether it can be claimed even if such condition to maintain the senior citizen in present in the transfer agreement or not. There have been many judicial pronouncements ion this matter and the problem posed is that some held that such a condition is not mandatory to be present while the others held that it is mandatory to have such a condition. In such a case, it falls on the mercy of the court as to what their reasoning is.

The act went ahead and also included provisions for establishment of old age home by state governments but given that it is a “may” provision, we have not seen much development in this area. The act also provides for partly or fully funded hospitals beds for senior citizens, separate queues, research and facility for treatment of chronic, terminal and degenerative diseases all to be done by state government.

Judicial background

In Pranav Singh v. Mahendra Prasad Singh, it was highlighted that the Act was primarily introduced to address the hardship and neglect experienced by parents at the hands of their children[3]. The Act ensures better and more effective measures for the maintenance and welfare of parents and senior citizens which is in lines with the Constitution.

In the case of Joy and Others v. Tribunal for Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens and Others, the court highlighted the myriads of protections offered by the Act to the senior citizens. The Act allows them to seek maintenance from their children and relatives as well as ensure access to medical care, safety of their life and property, and provides for mechanism to penalise and imprison whose who violate these rights[4]. Additionally, the definition of “maintenance” is broad in ambit and includes essentials like clothing, food, housing, healthcare, and treatment. Moreover, Section 4 clearly requires children to provide for their parents so that they can lead a normal and dignified lives.

The Supreme Court emphasized on implementing rights and welfare schemes for senior citizens and the parents[5] in Ashwani Kumar v. Union of India. As per the Senior Citizens Act, the Court delivered directives in protection of their statutory and fundamental rights, such as the right to health, dignity, shelter, and protection, as well as other welfare programs and schemes and an adequate pension.

The Delhi High Court[6] in the case of Pawan Reley & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors. held that a senior citizen can choose to be represented by a lawyer or appear in person before the tribunal. The Karnataka High Court and the Punjab and Haryana High Court have both maintained a similar position, thereby reaffirming senior citizens’ right to legal counsel in these proceedings.

In S. Vanitha v. The Deputy Commissioner, the Supreme Court emphasized on the clauses found in Section 23(1) of the Act. It was held that when the property is transferred with the condition that the transferee will meet the needs and maintenance of senior citizen, the transfer is deemed void if the condition is not met.  Such a transfer is deemed to have been affected by fraud, coercion, or undue influence, ensuring that senior citizens are not deprived of their rights or neglected after transferring property[7]. While in some other supreme court and high court cases, it was held that the condition to be present in transfer agreement is not mandatory and it is presumed that the senior citizen will be maintained and in case they fail to do so, the transfer of the property will be held void.

The Delhi High Court addressed whether a daughter-in-law or son-in-law can be evicted from a senior citizen’s property under the Delhi Senior Citizen Rules. It held that a daughter-in-law’s right to reside in her in-laws’ premises cannot exceed her husband’s rights. The Court interpreted the term “son and daughter or legal heirs” under the Rules to include not only the children of the senior citizen but also their families. Furthermore, the term “legal heirs” must be understood broadly, acknowledging that a daughter-in-law could be considered a legal heir in specific circumstances, such as being the widow of a predeceased son. This position was upheld in Sunny Paul v. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors[8].

Even if a senior citizen’s legal claim to a property is found on a lesser “right” or “interest,” rather than full ownership, the Delhi High Court decided that they can nevertheless assert the right to exclusive residence in that property. Special emphasis should be given to the mental health of the senior citizen while coming up with the judgement. This ruling emphasized the Act’s main objective is to safeguard and ensure the welfare of senior citizens under the Act.

In Shuchi Goel v. Shashi Goel & Others, the Court recognized several rights and obligations outlined in the Senior Citizens Act. Senior citizens are entitled to monetary maintenance, the right to live a normal and dignified life, and daily living allowances. Children and grandchildren are obligated to maintain their parents or grandparents, while relatives who possess or are entitled to inherit a senior citizen’s property must also fulfil this responsibility.

The State is tasked with providing broader support, such as establishing old-age homes, ensuring medical care, allocating hospital beds for senior citizens, and fostering research for their benefit, as mandated by Sections 19 and 20 of the Act[9]. Under Section 23, any property transfer by a senior citizen becomes void if the transferee fails to provide for their basic needs, as such transfers are presumed to be fraudulent or coerced. Abandoning a senior citizen is a punishable offense under Section 24, and Section 32 empowers the State Government to create rules to effectively implement the Act.

Issues not addressed

While the act provides for maintenance, it has also set a maximum limit at 10,000 rupees. The legislators failed to understand that the normal life of some might entail ten thousand rupees or in some cases, more than that. Not only this, in a Hight court judgement the court held that a maintenance of 7 lakh rupees should be given to the senior citizen for their property which not only breaches the limit but also goes way beyond it. According to Section 2(b) of the Act, maintenance consists solely of the bare necessities of clothing, food, housing, and medical care. A literal interpretation of the phrase suggests that security and safety, which enable senior citizens to live peaceful, respectable lives, are not included in maintenance.

State governments are required by Section 7 of the Act to establish one or more Maintenance Tribunals in each subdivision within six months of the MWPSC Act’s enactment[10]. The applications submitted under Section 5 must be adjudicated and decided by these tribunals, which must be chaired by a Sub-divisional Officer (SDO) or an officer above the rank of SDO[11]. It is arguable, though, that only a small number of states were able to successfully set up Maintenance Tribunals in each of the corresponding subdivisions.

The state government is required by Section 19 of the Act to establish and manage a minimum of one senior living facility in every state district. “The State Government may establish and maintain such number of old-age homes at accessible places, as it may deem necessary, in a phased manner,” according to Section 19(1) of the Act. At least 150 elderly men and women who are impoverished and therefore unable to pay for any stay elsewhere are expected to be housed in each of these assisted living facilities. However, as many districts have not yet established old-age homes, in violation of Section 19(1) of the Act, the words “may” and “phased” in that section suggest that such a directive lacks force.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 serves as a vital legal instrument for ensuring the welfare of elderly individuals in India. It not only establishes the legal duty of children and relatives to provide for the maintenance of their senior family members, but also provides mechanisms for dispute resolution, penalties for neglect, and protections for property. The Act highlights the importance of family responsibility while also recognizing the role of the state in providing for senior citizens who do not have family support. However, the full implementation of the Act requires continued effort from both the government and society. It is essential that we continue to raise awareness about the rights of senior citizens and work to create a society where the elderly are valued, respected, and cared for, ensuring they can enjoy their later years in comfort and dignity.

Author: AANVEE AGGRWA, in case of any queries please contact/write back to us via email to chhavi@khuranaandkhurana.com or at Khurana & Khurana, Advocates and IP Attorney.

[1] The Maintenance of Parents and Welfare of Senior Citizens Act 2007 s 4.

[2] The Maintenance of Parents and Welfare of Senior Citizens Act 2007 s 23.

[3] Pranav Singh v Mahendra Prasad Singh (2012) SCC OnLine Cal 4132

[4] Joy and Others v. Tribunal for Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens and Others (2020) SCC OnLine Ker 16721

[5] Ashwani Kumar v. Union of India (2019) 2 SCC 636

[6] Pawan Reley & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors (2022) SCC OnLine Del 3221

[7] S. Vanitha v. The Deputy Commissioner (2021) 15 SCC 730

[8] Sunny Paul v. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors 2017 SCC OnLine Del 7451

[9] Shuchi Goel v. Shashi Goel & Others (2023 SCC OnLine Del 2141)

[10] The Maintenance of Parents and Welfare of Senior Citizens Act 2007 s 7.

[11] The Maintenance of Parents and Welfare of Senior Citizens Act 2007 s 5.