High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/11021/2017dismissed

Dayanand & ORS v. Appellate Tribunal-Cum-Deputy Commissioner, Panipat & ORS

2017-07-17Mr. Justice R.P. Nagrath2 pages

Vinod Kumar 2017.07.19 12:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP No.11021 of 2017 [ 1 ] *****

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP No.11021 of 2017 Date of decision:17.07.2017 Dayanand and others

...Petitioners

Versus

Appellate Tribunal-cum-Deputy Commissioner, Panipat & ors. ...Respondents Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain

Present:

Mr. Parveen Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioners.

***** Rakesh Kumar Jain, J. (Oral) This petition is filed to challenge the orders passed by the Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal passed under Section 23 of the Maintenance & Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act").

Respondent No.3, father of petitioner no.1, who is father of petitioners no.2 and 3, had executed a power of attorney in favour of his son i.e. petitioner no.1 who, on the basis of the said power of attorney, transferred the property in question to his sons i.e. petitioners no.2 and 3 by way of registered release deed dated 03.08.2015. Since petitioner no.1 was not looking after his father, therefore, he filed an application under Section 23 of the Act and the Tribunal, after taking into consideration the facts and circumstances and the evidence on record, passed the order of cancellation of the aforesaid release deed. The petitioners challenged the order of the Tribunal

CWP No.11021 of 2017 [ 2 ] ***** by way of an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal but the same was also dismissed on the ground that the petitioners are using filthy language and are not paying respect much-less looking after respondent no.3, on whose instance petitioner no.1 had transferred the property in question in favour of petitioners no.2 and 3.

Counsel for the petitioners failed to point out any defect in the impugned orders.

Consequently, the present writ petition is dismissed being denuded of any merit.

July 17, 2017 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) vinod* Judge Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No