If ill-treated, elderly parents can take back property gifted to son: Bombay HC

Elderly parents, if ill treated, can take back property gifted to their son, says the Bombay High Court. Upholding an order passed by the Maintenance Tribunal, the Bench of Justice Ranjit More and Justice Anuja Prabhudesai said under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, the gift deed can be cancelled.

According to a report from the Economic Times the Act, passed in 2007, has provisions that protect parents and elderly persons who have signed away their property or assets to a person so that they would be taken care of, but are then left destitute.
Quoting the Bench, the report says, “The gift deed was made at the request of the son and his wife. It is implied that the elderly father and his second wife would be looked after by them after transfer of 50% share in the flat. Obviously, the son and his wife though ready and willing to look after the father were unwilling to do so in respect of the second wife. In the above circumstances, we do not find any error in the order (cancelling the gift deed), therefore, we are not inclined to entertain this petition.”
Sharing details of the case, the report says, the senior citizen, after death of his wife, wanted to remarry. At that time, his son and daughter-in-law requested him to transfer 50% share in his flat at Andheri, which he did in May 2014. However, after the marriage, the son and daughter-in-law started insulting second wife of the senior citizen, and both were forced to leave their Andheri flat. The father then filed application in the Maintenance Tribunal, which ruled in his favour. However, the son challenged this order in the High Court.

‘Food items and bottled water should be sold at regular prices inside multiplexes’

The Bombay High Court has ruled that food items and bottled water be sold at regular prices inside multiplexes. The directive was issued by a division bench of Justices S.M. Kemkar and M.S. Karnik last week in response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Mumbai resident Jainendra Baxi. He had challenged the prohibition on carrying outside food in movie theatres and multiplexes across Maharashtra, according to the Economic Times.
Justice Kemkar observed: “The price of food and water bottles sold inside movie theatres are, indeed, exorbitant. We have ourselves experienced it. You (multiplexes) should sell it at the regular price.”
The court said that if multiplexes were prohibiting people from bringing outside food, then there should be a total prohibition on eatables. “Then you (multiplexes) cannot have your own vendors selling food and other snacks inside,” said Justice Kemkar.
The government pleader, Purnima Kantharia, told the court that the state would soon frame a policy on the issue, after taking into consideration the suggestions of the petitioner and the Multiplex Owners’ Association (MOA). The MOA is a nationwide body of cinema theatre owners. The policy is likely to be framed within the next six weeks, she told the court. The bench will now hear the petition on 12th June.

Consumer confidence has waned since December 2017 – RBI Survey

Consumer confidence has waned since December 2017 with respondents to an RBI survey being more pessimistic about the current economic situation and employment opportunities compared to a year ago. The only area where sentiment is in the optimistic zone is in spending on essential and non-essential items, according to a report in the Economic Times.
“Households’ current perceptions on the general economic situation dived sharply from the neutral level polled in the last round. Their one-year-ahead outlook also deteriorated, but remained in the optimistic domain,” the RBI said in a statement. What this means is that while most people believe that economic growth will pick up in 12 months, there are fewer people feeling that way compared to earlier.
“Respondents continued to express concern about the current employment situation, and outlook for the year ahead was less positive than in the previous round,” the RBI said. Households’ assessment of the current price situation and the outlook a year ahead has broadly remained unchanged.
The responses to the survey had gone into pessimist territory from June 2013 when the rupee had crashed during the ‘Taper Tantrums’. After that, they have been largely optimistic since March 2013. They slipped back to pessimism again in the quarter following demonetisation in November 2016 and have been there ever since, according to the Economic Times.


Bank liable for reneging on settlement of dues

Case Study: Ajay Singh Chauhan took a loan from Citibank. He defaulted in making payments of some EMIs. On 27th April, 2007, the bank offered a structured repayment plan for settlement of the entire dues. As per the offer, the entire outstanding would be considered as settled on payment of Rs 40,000, provided the amount was paid by the following day and Chauhan paid the amount the same day.

On 21st May, 2008, Citibank sent a letter demanding a further payment of Rs 30,000. On being questioned, the bank said its dues could not be considered as having been settled since Chauhan had not returned a signed copy of the bank’s letter accepting its offer.

Chauhan then filed a complaint before the Jaipur District Forum alleging deficiency in services and the complaint was contested by the bank. The forum upheld the complaint and ordered a “no dues” certificate to be issued. Further, considering the bank’s conduct, Citibank was ordered to pay Rs 10 lakh, out of which Rs 1 lakh would go to Chauhan as compensation for harassment and mental agony. The remaining 

Rs.9 lakh was meant for the Rajasthan State Consumer Welfare Fund. In addition, Chauhan was also awarded Rs 20,000 towards litigation costs.

The bank challenged this order before the Rajasthan State Commission but its appeal was dismissed. Citibank then filed a revision petition, contending Chauhan was a perpetual defaulter in paying EMIs.

The National Commission observed that the question of being a habitual defaulter was not relevant, as the issue was about the validity of the settlement. The commission noted there was no dispute about Chauhan having paid Rs 40,000 within the time given in the offer. The commission held Citibank’s demand for a further amount, made after more than a year, was not justified and did not behove a bank of its stature.

On 6th March, the commission held Chauhan was entitled to get a “no dues” certificate. It also considered the award of Rs 1 lakh as compensation and Rs 20,000 towards cost payable to Chauhan was justified. However, the penal compensation payable to Rajasthan State Consumer Welfare Fund was reduced to Rs 50,000/.

Conclusion: A bank cannot renege from its settlement offer when the borrower clears dues in the stipulated period.

Jehangir B Gai

ePaper, The Times of India, Bombay, April 2, 2018, Page 4:

(The author is a consumer activist and has won the Govt. of India’s National Youth Award for Consumer Protection. His email is jehangir.gai.columnist@outlook.in)

Access to Justice and Public Interest Litigation


The Asiatic Society of Mumbai

takes pleasure in inviting you and your friends to

the 25th Smt. Bansari Sheth Memorial Lecture


Mrs. Justice Sujata Manohar

Former Judge, Supreme Court of India


Former Chairperson, Board of Trustees of the Society,


‘Access to Justice and Public Interest Litigation’


Thursday, 8th March, 2018, at 5.30 p.m.

in the Durbar Hall of the Society.

Mr. Justice B.N. Srikrishna

Former Judge, Supreme Court of India


Former Chairperson, Board of Trustees of the Society,

 will preside.

Please join us for tea at 5.00 p.m.

         Dr. Meena Vaishampayan                                Prof. Vispi Balaporia

         Chairperson                                                        Hon. Secretary

         Endowment Lectures Committee

The Law of Registration

(As under Transfer of Property Act-1882 & Registration Act-1908)



Registration Fee vs. Stamp Duty

  • ‘Registration fee’ is charged by the Government to keep a document in public records.
    • ‘Stamp duty’ is levied by the Government to raise revenue and to recognise a right.
    • The ‘Law of Registration’ in India is explained under…..
      • The Transfer of Property Act-1882
      •  The Registration Act-1908

To read the full details – Click Here

Do NOT sign Registered AD letter Acknowledgements

Perhaps one more idea to be Vigilant ?..

Shared By Adv. Vinod Sampat
Note under certificate of posting is now stopped.

From ‘Lawyers Talk: 8618’
Without Prejudice.
Dear all,
Something to ponder about when receiving registered letter.
How often do we take the trouble of opening the letter before signing the Registered AD (Acknowledgement Due) Letter acknowledgement slip?
Read to find out more…. in future be cautious.

Open letters BEFORE signing to acknowledge receipt of the Registered AD (Acknowledgement Due) Letter..!!!
Folks, the next time the postman or courier guy comes to deliver a Registered AD (Acknowledgement Due) Letter, a Certificate Of Posting Letter or Parcel, do the following:
a) Check who is it from..??
b) If you do not know the source, reject it.
If you accept it without knowing the source, the following has happened and can happen to you too…
There have been cases where lawyers have done the following:
a) Mailed empty / sealed Registered AD (Acknowledgement Due) Letter to people on behalf of their clients for some court case matter.
b) The Registered AD (Acknowledgement Due) Letter either, consisted of brochures promoting sale of new real estate or some car model or just an empty A4 size paper inside. In normal circumstances, when one receives an empty letter or junk mail, they will just tear it up and throw it away, BUT BUT, here lies the danger:
a) You signed the Registered AD (Acknowledgement Due) Letter acknowledgement card and it is returned to the law firm. That signed Registered AD (Acknowledgement Due) Letter
acknowledgement card is proof that a letter was delivered and confirms the delivery and can/will be used against you in court.
b) Same applies to the so very convenient “CERTIFICATE OF POSTING” mail.  When the grace period for you to respond is over,  they quietly go to court and show proof that a Registered AD  (Acknowledgement Due) Letter was sent to you as a reminder and you did not bother to defend it and thus convince the court officials and get a judgement against you.
Next another Registered AD (Acknowledgement Due) Letter is sent to you asking for damages approved by the court, or just another empty envelope and you discard it once more and this  time the white collar crook will go to the court quietly and seek the assistance of the court to seal/attach your property to recover the amount awarded by the court and soon the court bailiff will be at your door step to execute the order.
What happens next..?
You frantically call your relatives in disbelief and seek legal advise.
You are lost not knowing what’s happening.
Anxiety, stress, palpitation, sleepless nights cannot be compensated as this is a reality check. You engage a lawyer’s firm, spend a many thousand rupees for paper work and an appeal to the Higher court
to set aside this matter… and also spend several days in court trying to prove your innocence.
What are your rights.??
a) You have every right to reject any mail / parcel that comes from unknown sources, be it a debt collection company, law firm or some individual.
b) You have every right to ask the postman or the person delivering it to open the mail and let you see what is inside and the contents of the letter.
c) REJECT IT if you are not comfortable… or ask them to deliver to a law firm that you know.
d) If you have inadvertently signed and collected the empty Registered AD (Acknowledgement Due) Letter/mail, lodge a police report and also report to the bar council… as this will help in your case to protect you… if the matter goes to court.
Eye opener isn’t it, crime is no longer just house break-ins and snatch thefts where most of the thieves get a few hundred rupees… BUT these days, the crooks come dressed in suits, so be aware and be smart… or you will end up spending thousands of rupees, many hours spent travelling to court or to your
lawyers office, not forgetting the stress, anxiety, sleepless nights, etc. Do inform ALL your family members staff….
let the postman leave a card,
go check at the post office,
ask the postman to open and
show you what is inside the envelope…
or lastly…
if you are not comfortable, just reject it…