top of page

By:

C.S. Krishnamurthy

21 June 2025 at 2:15:51 pm

Parents Before Property

The Bombay High Court’s recent decision upholding the cancellation of a gift deed executed by elderly parents in favour of their son is more than a legal victory. It is a timely reminder that parenthood cannot be reduced to a property transaction. By affirming that parents may revoke a property transfer when children fail to honour their obligation of care and support, the Court has reinforced a principle that is both legal and moral. The verdict in the Ashwin Ramesh Soni v. Ramesh Bachaulal...

Parents Before Property

The Bombay High Court’s recent decision upholding the cancellation of a gift deed executed by elderly parents in favour of their son is more than a legal victory. It is a timely reminder that parenthood cannot be reduced to a property transaction. By affirming that parents may revoke a property transfer when children fail to honour their obligation of care and support, the Court has reinforced a principle that is both legal and moral. The verdict in the Ashwin Ramesh Soni v. Ramesh Bachaulal Soni & Ors., reinforces the objective of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. The Court recognised that when parents transfer property with the legitimate expectation of being cared for, and that expectation is wilfully defeated, the law can restore justice. A gift founded on trust cannot survive when that trust is fundamentally breached. The judgement raises uncomfortable questions. What does it say about society when ageing parents must seek justice against their own children? Why should those who devoted a lifetime to raising families spend their twilight years proving that they deserve dignity? Have we begun to mistake inheritance for entitlement and affection for convenience? Changing Times These are not merely legal questions. They reflect the changing character of Indian families. India takes pride in its tradition of strong family bonds. Close-knit families, cherished traditions and an enduring culture of honouring parents have long defined our collective identity. Such images have long symbolised the country’s cultural strength. But growing reports of elder abuse present a sobering reality. Many parents experience neglect, emotional humiliation or isolation within homes they built. Some are confined to a single room after transferring property. Others are abandoned altogether. The emotional trauma often outweighs the financial loss. The ruling recognises what may be called an unwritten family contract. Parents spend decades sacrificing personal comforts to educate children, fund their ambitions, conduct weddings and build family assets. In return, they expect not luxury but companionship, care, respect and emotional security. By acknowledging that certain family transactions rest on mutual trust rather than legal formalities alone, the Court has reaffirmed that the law will protect vulnerable senior citizens when that trust is exploited. Reports frequently describe retired parents evicted from homes gifted to children, widowed mothers fighting prolonged legal battles for shelter, and elderly couples seeking police protection against their own offspring. Many such cases remain hidden because families fear social stigma more than personal suffering. Family Trust The Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 was enacted precisely because traditional family safeguards were proving inadequate. Section 23 empowers authorities to declare property transfers void when they are made on the understanding that the recipient will provide for the transferor's basic needs, but subsequently fails to do so. The verdict has given practical meaning to this safeguard by making it clear that the law will not remain a silent spectator when trust is betrayed. Some critics argue that legal intervention weakens family relationships. The opposite is true. Good laws exist not because every family fails but because some do. Just as traffic laws protect responsible drivers from reckless ones, laws safeguarding parents protect families from exploitation without diminishing genuine affection. But society also has responsibilities. Financial advisers should caution senior citizens against transferring valuable assets prematurely. In many situations, a well-drafted will offers greater protection than an outright gift deed. Where property is transferred during one's lifetime, expectations regarding care and maintenance should be clearly documented to minimise future disputes. Children should remember that caring for ageing parents is not charity. It is gratitude expressed through everyday actions. I recall meeting an elderly gentleman at a bank several years ago. He proudly showed me documents transferring his house to his only son and remarked with complete confidence, “Now I have no worries. My son will take care of everything.” His face reflected absolute trust. Thankfully, countless children justify such trust every day. But when that faith is broken, the emotional consequences can be devastating. Indian culture has long viewed caring for parents as a privilege, not a burden. Honouring parents goes beyond living together. A caring phone call, a visit during illness, financial support or shared moments can bring comfort, dignity and belonging. Loneliness often wounds seniors more deeply than disease. When parents must approach courts for protection from their own children, it is time for society to introspect. (The writer is a retired banker and author. He can be reached at krs1957@hotmail.com. Views personal.)

How DeepSeek Is Making Silicon Valley Nervous

Updated: Feb 18, 2025

DeepSeek

Until recently, the artificial intelligence (AI) ‘arms race’ seemed like an all-American affair. OpenAI’s ChatGPT led the charge, with Google’s Gemini and Meta’s LLaMA models not far behind. American dominance in AI was assumed to be an inevitability, and an extension of Silicon Valley’s long-standing supremacy. Now, DeepSeek, the homegrown Chinese model has sent tremors through the AI industry, despite its baggage of state-backed propaganda.


DeepSeek’s emergence should have been unremarkable: yet another large language model (LLM), another iteration in a rapidly evolving space. But it has out-optimized its American competitors by achieving comparable - if not better - results through an optimized co-design of algorithms, frameworks and hardware. Since it is not just a matter of fewer parameters but also the algorithms operating on them more efficiently.


This has thrown a wrench into Meta’s grand AI ambitions. Meta, along with OpenAI and Google, have built their models on the assumption that more parameters mean better performance. Training these behemoth models requires staggering computational resources, and American tech firms have been quick to justify their exorbitant costs. But DeepSeek has shown otherwise. It has outperformed GPT-4o and Claude 3.5 Sonnet - the two US flagship models - on a series of standard and open-ended benchmarks.


Unlike its closed-source competitors, DeepSeek has open-sourced its model, allowing smaller players to adapt it without relying on subscription services of OpenAI or Anthropic. Small but clever modifications like the use of rotary embeddings and group relative policy optimization (GRPO) - a reinforcement learning paradigm - have led it to achieve impressive results without the usual computational bloat.


This has made American AI firms uneasy. Perplexity, a relatively small startup in the U.S., had to rely on post-training methods rather than foundational model training because it simply lacked the resources. Aravind Srinivas, CEO of Perplexity, has publicly noted how DeepSeek’s cost-effectiveness exposed flaws in the current American approach. Whereas OpenAI and Google charge sky-high fees for API access, DeepSeek offers a pricing structure - around $0.34 per 1,000 tokens - that undercuts them significantly.


For years, the prevailing assumption in AI research was that Western firms, with their access to the best talent and most powerful hardware, would remain untouchable. Yet, DeepSeek has shown that even modest improvements in model efficiency can disrupt the market. And now, other countries are taking notice.


American tech firms and policymakers alike have been quick to point out its ties to the Chinese government, warning of potential security risks and propaganda concerns. These concerns are not unfounded. AI models trained in authoritarian regimes inevitably reflect the biases of their environment, and DeepSeek is no exception. But to dismiss its technical achievements outright would be myopic. The reality is that DeepSeek’s advancements are not confined to China. Its innovations in model optimization can be repurposed by anyone. The backlash also smacks of a certain American hubris. Silicon Valley has long viewed itself as the sole architect of the AI revolution. When OpenAI and Google release new models, the conversation revolves around their transformative potential. When China does the same, the narrative shifts to fears of espionage and state control. It is in the interests of American firms to bash DeepSeek not just for geopolitical reasons, but because it threatens their bottom line.


While DeepSeek is unlikely to dethrone OpenAI or Google anytime soon, and its government ties will always make it a controversial player in global AI development, its existence has nonetheless forced a reckoning in Silicon Valley. It has shown that more efficient AI is possible and that cost need not be a barrier to entry. For the first time in a long while, Silicon Valley is feeling just a little bit jealous.(The author is a U.S.-based data scientist)

Comments

bottom of page