Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Ashish Kansal
Format: Recurso digital
Language:
Published: Zenodo 2025
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19694374
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1866901218636333056
author Ashish Kansal
author_facet Ashish Kansal
contents This paper discusses the landmark judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. This case revolves around Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (hereinafter 'Äòthe Act'), which deals with 'ÄúTransfer of property to be void in certain circumstances'Äù. Basically, the Apex Court held that senior citizens have the right to take back their transferred property if they are not maintained, for their term of life, by the transferee. Therefore, in the present case, the appellant is the mother of the respondent who had been restored with the property which was primarily transferred to the respondent by the appellant.
format Recurso digital
id zenodo_https___doi_org_10_5281_zenodo_19694374
institution Zenodo
language
publishDate 2025
publisher Zenodo
record_format zenodo
spellingShingle CASE COMMENTARY ON URMILA DIXIT VS. SUNIL SHARAN DIXIT AND ORS. 2025 INSC 20
Ashish Kansal
This paper discusses the landmark judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. This case revolves around Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (hereinafter 'Äòthe Act'), which deals with 'ÄúTransfer of property to be void in certain circumstances'Äù. Basically, the Apex Court held that senior citizens have the right to take back their transferred property if they are not maintained, for their term of life, by the transferee. Therefore, in the present case, the appellant is the mother of the respondent who had been restored with the property which was primarily transferred to the respondent by the appellant.
title CASE COMMENTARY ON URMILA DIXIT VS. SUNIL SHARAN DIXIT AND ORS. 2025 INSC 20
url https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19694374