SMT. BHARATHI vs SMT. RATHNAMMA

Court
Karnataka High Court

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:54009
WP No. 55890 of 2017


CNR: KAHC010139802017





IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

TH
DATED THIS THE 29 DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2026


BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

WRIT PETITION NO. 55890 OF 2017 (GM-RES)

BETWEEN:

1. SMT. BHARATHI
W/O LATE KUMAR,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.75,
15TH CROSS, E BLOCK,
JP NAGAR, MYSURU - 570 014.

2. KUM. SOWMYASHREE
D/O LATE KUMAR
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
RESIDING AT NO.75,
15TH CROSS, E BLOCK,
JP NAGAR, MYSURU - 570 014.
…PETITIONERS











(BY MISS. ADITI GURJER, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. GEORGE JOSEPH, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. SMT. RATHNAMMA
W/O LATE CHANDREGOWDA,
D/O HARUVAIAH,
C/O KRISHNAMALLEGOWDA,
R/AT DOOR NO.246, 20TH MAIN,
3RD STAGE, VIJAYANAGARA,
MYSURU - 570 017.

Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:54009
WP No. 55890 of 2017


CNR: KAHC010139802017



2. NEELAVATHI
C/O CHANDRA.C
NO.764, MADHUBANA, 1ST CROSS,
10TH MAIN, 1ST STAGE,
VIJAYANAGARA, DEVARAJA MOHALLA
MYSURU - 570 017.

3.
RAMU
NO.1991, 2ND STAGE, VIJAYNAGAR,
MYSURU - 570 017.

4. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
MYSURU SUB DIVISION,
MYSURU - 570 001.

5. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
MYSURU SUB DIVISION,
MYSURU - 570 001.

6.
MR.NAVEEN
S/O RATHNAMMA
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
R/AT NO.1623, 5TH CROSS,
HOSAKERI, K.R.MOHALLA MYSURU,
MYSURU - 570 024.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B.K. MOHAN, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. V. MANJUNATH RAYAPPA, AGA FOR R4 AND R5;
R6 - NAVEEN - SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 22.02.2017 PASSED BY R-5 IN
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:54009
WP No. 55890 of 2017


CNR: KAHC010139802017



REVISION MISC.NO.HI.NA.KA 31/2016-17 AT ANNEXURE A
AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR FURTHER HEARING,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

ORAL ORDER

The petitioners are before this Court calling in question
the order dated 22.02.2017 passed by the fifth respondent–
Senior Citizen Tribunal, whereby the petitioners have been
directed to pay a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- to the first respondent
towards the sale proceeds of the property which had been
gifted by the first respondent in favour of the second petitioner.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners, the learned counsel appearing for the first
respondent–Senior Citizen, and the learned Additional
Government Advocate appearing for respondents No.4 and 5.
3. The facts which are not in serious dispute are that the
first respondent, who is the mother of the first petitioner and
grandmother of the second petitioner, had executed a
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:54009
WP No. 55890 of 2017


CNR: KAHC010139802017



registered gift deed dated 27.11.2010 in favour of the second
petitioner, conveying the property owned by her. The second
petitioner subsequently alienated the said property in favour of
respondents No.5 and 6.
4. The first respondent thereafter approached the Senior
Citizen Tribunal seeking maintenance and also sought
cancellation of the gift deed executed in favour of the second
petitioner. The Tribunal, taking note of the alienation of the
gifted property by the second petitioner, directed payment of
monthly maintenance of Rs.5,000/- to the first respondent and
further directed the petitioners to pay a sum of Rs.6,00,000/-
towards compensation representing the sale proceeds of the
gifted property.
5. Aggrieved by the said order, the present writ petition
has been instituted by the petitioners, who are the daughter
and granddaughter respectively of the first respondent. During
the pendency of the writ petition, this Court had stayed the
operation of the impugned order subject to the petitioners
paying monthly maintenance at the rate of Rs.3,000/- to the
first respondent.
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:54009
WP No. 55890 of 2017


CNR: KAHC010139802017



6. The matter was heard at length on the previous
occasion. Having regard to the relationship between the parties
and the nature of the dispute, learned counsel appearing for
the parties were requested to explore the possibility of an
amicable settlement and make their submissions today.
7. Today, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners,
on instructions, submits that the first petitioner is willing to pay
monthly maintenance at the rate of Rs.5,000/- to the first
respondent.
8. On being queried with regard to the financial position
of the first petitioner, learned counsel, on instructions, submits
that the first petitioner is a Group-D employee and is drawing a
gross salary of approximately Rs.70,000/- per month and, after
statutory and other deductions, receives approximately
Rs.45,000/- per month.
9. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the first
respondent, on instructions, fairly submits that the first
respondent is receiving widow pension of Rs.12,000/- per
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:54009
WP No. 55890 of 2017


CNR: KAHC010139802017



month and is also working as a domestic help, from which she
earns approximately Rs.1,200/- per month.
10. This Court has given its anxious consideration to the
rival submissions and has also taken into account the peculiar
facts and circumstances of the case. The first respondent is
aged about 68 years. It is not in dispute that she is not being
looked after by her son. It is also not in dispute that she had
gifted the property owned by her in favour of the second
petitioner, her granddaughter, under a registered gift deed.
11. The obligation of a daughter towards her aged mother
cannot be lost sight of merely because the mother is receiving
a pension or has a small source of income. At the same time,
while determining the quantum of maintenance, the Court is
required to have regard to the financial capacity of the person
liable to maintain as well as the actual needs and independent
income of the senior citizen.
12. The material placed before this Court indicates that
neither side is possessed of substantial financial means. The
first respondent has an independent income by way of widow
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:54009
WP No. 55890 of 2017


CNR: KAHC010139802017



pension and a small earning from domestic work. The first
petitioner, on the other hand, is a Group-D employee and, after
deductions, receives approximately Rs.45,000/- per month. The
equities, therefore, have to be balanced having regard to the
status and financial circumstances of both parties.
13. In the considered opinion of this Court, payment of
maintenance at the rate of Rs.6,500/- per month by the first
petitioner would adequately meet the basic requirements of the
first respondent, while at the same time not imposing an
unreasonable financial burden upon the first petitioner.
14. As regards the direction issued by the Tribunal for
payment of Rs.6,00,000/- towards the sale proceeds of the
gifted property, this Court is of the view that the said direction,
in the facts and circumstances of the present case, calls for
interference. The property had already been alienated by the
second petitioner and third-party rights have been created. It is
also the specific submission on behalf of the petitioners that the
alienation was made to meet the legal necessities of the first
and second petitioners.
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:54009
WP No. 55890 of 2017


CNR: KAHC010139802017



15. While the fact that the first respondent had divested
herself of the only property owned by her and that the property
was subsequently alienated cannot be ignored, the equities
between the parties can appropriately be balanced by securing
a reasonable and continuing source of maintenance to the first
respondent. The direction to deposit the entire sale
consideration of Rs.6,00,000/- would, in the peculiar facts of
the case, be disproportionate and unduly onerous.
16. This Court is, therefore, of the view that the
appropriate course would be to set aside the direction for
payment of Rs.6,00,000/- to the first respondent, subject to
the first petitioner continuing to discharge her obligation to
maintain the first respondent by paying monthly maintenance
of Rs.6,500/- regularly.
17. It is, however, made clear that the present
determination of maintenance is based upon the financial
circumstances and other relevant facts placed before this Court
as on date. The first respondent shall be at liberty to approach
the competent Senior Citizen Tribunal for enhancement of
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:54009
WP No. 55890 of 2017


CNR: KAHC010139802017



maintenance, if circumstances so warrant, after expiry of three
years from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
18. Since the petitioners had the benefit of an interim
order during the pendency of this petition and were, pursuant
thereto, paying maintenance at the rate of Rs.3,000/- per
month as against the amount of Rs.5,000/- awarded by the
Tribunal, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the
petitioners to pay a consolidated sum of Rs.15,000/- to the first
respondent towards the differential maintenance for the
intervening period.
19. Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass the
following:
ORDER
i. The writ petition is allowed in part .
ii. The order dated 22.02.2017 passed by the fifth
respondent–Senior Citizen Tribunal, insofar as it directs
the petitioners to pay a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- to the
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 10 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:54009
WP No. 55890 of 2017


CNR: KAHC010139802017



first respondent towards the sale proceeds of the gifted
property, is hereby set aside.
iii. The first petitioner shall pay monthly maintenance of
Rs.6,500/- (Rupees Six Thousand Five Hundred only) to
the first respondent by directly crediting the said
amount to the bank account of the first respondent on
or before the 5th day of every calendar month.
iv. The petitioners shall, towards the differential
maintenance for the period during which the interim
order was in force, pay a consolidated sum of
Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) directly to
the bank account of the first respondent within six
weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
v. The first respondent shall be at liberty to seek
enhancement of the monthly maintenance before the
competent Senior Citizen Tribunal, if circumstances so
warrant, after expiry of three years from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order.
Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

- 11 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:54009
WP No. 55890 of 2017


CNR: KAHC010139802017



vi. The order of the Tribunal shall stand modified to the
aforesaid extent.
vii. All other contentions are left open.


Digitally Signed By:
SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
Verified

(SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM)
JUDGE











HDK
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 24