RAMAKRISHNAN NAIR Vs. SURENDRAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The 3rd respondent in W. P. (C) No. 28734 of 2020 has preferred this appeal challenging the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 12.02.2021, whereby the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition filed by the 1st respondent in the appeal, after setting aside Ext. P3 order passed by the Sub Collector and Maintenance Tribunal, Thrissur, constituted as per the provisions of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (hereinafter called as 'Act 2007').

(2.) The paramount contention advanced by the writ petitioner was that the appellant has executed a settlement deed in favour of the 1 st respondent, who is none other than the nephew of the appellant, without any reservations and conditions in the document and therefore the cancellation of the deed made by the tribunal cannot be sustained under law.

(3.) On the other hand the appellant contended before the learned Single Judge that the issue is squarely covered by a judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court in Radhamani v. State of Kerala , 2016 1 KerLT 185 which was approved by a Full Bench of this Court in Subhashini v. District Collector , 2020 5 KerLT 533 (F.B.)].