Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/8908/2026 of CHIMMIRI HANUMANTHA RAO Vs THE STATE OF AP on 21 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3330] TUESDAY, THE 22nd DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 8908/2026 Between: 1. CHIMMIRI HANUMANTHA RAO, S/O LATE RAGHAVAYYA, AGED ABOUT 71 YEARS, OCC NO
APHC010174562026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE 22nd DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 8908/2026
Between:
1. CHIMMIRI HANUMANTHA RAO, S/O LATE RAGHAVAYYA, AGED
ABOUT 71 YEARS, OCC NO OCCUPATION,R/O DOOR NO. I-G-SA
BRINDAVAN
COLONY,NEAR
UMESH
POLYTECHNIC
COLLEGE,GUJJANAGUNDIA, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. CHIMMIRI VASUNDARA, W/O CHIMMIRI HANUMANTHA RAO,AGED
ABOUT 59 YEARS, OCC HOUSE WIFE,R/O DOOR NO. 1-6-3/Y, BRINDAVAN
COLONY,NEAR
UMESH
POLYTECHNIC
COLLEGE,GUJJANAGUNDIA, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
1. THE STATE OF AP, REP BY ITS PRINICIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN AND CHILD WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI.
2. THE
DISTRICT
COLLECTOR
AND
DISTRICT
MAGISTRATE,
GUNTUR DISTRICT, GUNTUR, .
3. THE
REVENUE
DIVISIONAL
OFFICER
AND
SUBDIVISIONAL
MAGISTRATE, GUNTUR DIVISION, GUNTUR DISTRICT,
4. SRI CHIMMIRI VIDYASAGAR, S/O SRI CHIMMIRI HANUMANTHA
RAO, RESIDING AT 1960 W TARRANT RD, APT 2217,GRAND
PRAIRIE, TEXAS - 75050, USA.EMAIL VSCHIMMIRI@GMAIL.COM
CHIMMIRI. VIDYASAGAR@GMAIL.COM
...RESPONDENT(S):
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent - District Collector-cum- Appellate Authority, Guntur D.Dis.No.REVGNT-in CSECOMIS(MISC)/269/2025-SA(C1)-COLGNT dated 25.02.2026 confirming the order of the 3rd respondent Presiding Officer and Revenue Divisional Officer, Guntur in O.P. No.1673/2025-G dated 22.08.2025, as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the provisions and object of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, and violative of principles of natural justice, and consequently set aside the same and allow the petition filed by the petitioner under the said Act by granting all consequential reliefs including declaration of the Gift/Conveyance Deed dated 14.04.2023 as null and void and IA NO: 1 OF 2026
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to pass an interim order or direction, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition, directing the Respondent No. 4 to pay interim maintenance of a sum of f 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) per month each to the petitioner and his wife. It is from the date of filing of the Writ Petition, or such other amount as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case, having regard to the petitioner’s advanced age, recent bypass surgery, ongoing medical expenses, and total neglect by the respondent, and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2026
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to vacate the interim order dated 07.04.2026 passed in W.P.No.8908 of 2026 and dismiss the Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. RAVI TEJA DOMMETI
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR WOMEN DEV CHILD WELFARE
2. RAMAKRISHNA AKURATHI
The Court made the following:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
WRIT PETITION No.8908 OF 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: “…to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent - District Collector – cum - Appellate Authority, Guntur D.Dis.No.REVGNT-CSECO(MISC)/269/2025-SA(C1)-COLGNT dated 25.02.2026 confirming the order of the 3rd respondent - Presiding Officer and Revenue Divisional Officer, Guntur in O.P.No.1673/2025-G dated 22.08.2025, as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the provisions and object of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, and violative of principles of natural justice, and consequently set aside the same and allow the petition filed by the petitioner under the said Act by granting all consequential reliefs including declaration of the Gift/Conveyance Deed dated 14.04.2023 as null and void and pass such other order or orders.…”
2. The 1st petitioner herein filed O.P.No.1673/2025-G under Section 5 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (hereinafter for short ‘the Act’) seeking maintenance from his son and for cancellation of the Gift Deed executed by the 1st petitioner in favour of the 4th respondent. The 3rd respondent – Revenue Divisional Officer, vide order dated 22.08.2025, directed the 4th respondent not to alienate the property pertaining to House No.13, Door No.1-6-3/N, Gujjanagundla, Guntur, and permitted the petitioners to stay in the said property, however, not granted any maintenance to the petitioners.
3. Aggrieved by the order dated 22.08.2025, the 1st petitioner preferred appeal before the 2nd respondent-District Collector. The District Collector, vide order dated 25.02.2026, confirmed the order passed by the 3rd respondent, inter alia, observed that the petitioners are having two children one son settled in U.S.A., the 4th respondent herein, and a daughter residing in India. The 1st petitioner engaged in cotton business for about sixteen years and recently installed a weighbridge valued at about Twenty Lakhs. Though he claims financial losses and insolvency, it was found that he owns agricultural land and a house at Ravinuthala Village and continues to reside in the RCC building at Brindavan Colony, which was transferred to his son through Gift Deed bearing Doc.No.2194/2023. However, enquiry reveals that despite claiming financial distress, the petitioners are continuing business activities and is leading a comfortable life. Aggrieved by the order dated 25.02.2026, the present Writ Petition has been filed.
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the authorities failed to properly appreciate and apply Section 23 of the Act, which mandates that transfer made by the senior citizen, subjected to an implied condition of maintenance. The finding of the Tribunal and Appellate Tribunal observing that in the absence of an express condition in the gift deed, disentitles the relief and is contrary to law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case
Urmila Dixit Vs Sunil Sharan Dixit and other1 and the impugned orders suffer from non-application of mind and the respondents have failed to appreciate the petitioner’s (senior citizen) sever medical condition and vulnerability, render the findings perverse. Hence, prayed to set aside the impugned orders passed in O.P.No.1673/2025-G dated 22.08.2025, which is confirmed in the order dated 25.02.2026 by the appellate authority.
6. The findings of the Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal reveal that no reasoning was provided as to why the petitioner (senior citizen), is not entitled to the relief of cancellation of the executed gift deed. As the impugned orders are entirely bereft of reasons, regarding the contentions raised by the petitioners, learned counsel for the unofficial respondent has fairly conceded that the orders cannot be sustained. Consequently, the impugned orders should be set aside, and the matter should be remanded to the Tribunal for a fresh determination on its merits.
7. As such, without adverting into merits of the case, both the order passed in O.P.No.1673/2025-G dated 22.08.2025, and the appellate authority order dated 25.02.2026, are hereby set aside and the matter is remitted back to the 3rd respondent – Revenue Divisional Officer, to pass afresh orders after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioners as well as to the 4th respondent.
8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
__________________________________ JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO Date: 22.09.2026
KBN
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TARLADA RAJASEKHAR RAO
WRIT PETITION No.8908 of 2026 Date: 22.09.2026
KBN