M L PARIMALA vs THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60035
WP No. 4039 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010072332024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 28 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
WRIT PETITION NO. 4039 OF 2024 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
M.L PARIMALA
W/O KYATHANGERE SWAMY
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
ND
R/AT NO KT200, 2 CROSS
MARIGOWDA LAYOUT
MANDYA CITY - 571 401
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. H.C. SHIVARAMU, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
MANDYA SUB DIVISION
MANDYA - 571 401
2. THE TAHASILDHAR
MANDYA TALUK
MANDYA - 571 401
3. LINGAIAH
S/O LATE ANGADI ERREGOWDA
MIKERI VILLAGE
KIRUGAVALU HOBLI
MALAVALLI TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT - 571 430
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAJAYOGA K, HCGP FOR R1 & R2
SRI. D.L. DHANANJAYA, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
Digitally signed
by PANKAJA S
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60035
WP No. 4039 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010072332024
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO-DIRECT CALL FOR
RECORDS FROM THE R-1 IN CASE NO. M.S.C/106/2022-23
QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE R-1 IN CASE NO.
M.S.C./106/2022-23, DTD 16.11.2023 PRODUCED VIDE
ANNEXURE-E1.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS
UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
ORAL ORDER
This writ petition is filed seeking following reliefs:
"i. Call for records from the 1st respondent
in Case No.M.S.C/106/2022-23.
ii. Quash the order passed by the 1st
respondent in Case No.M.S.C/106/2022-23,
dated 16-11-2023 produced vide Annexure-E1.
iii. ALLOW this petition with costs and to
GRANT such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court
deems fit to grant in the circumstances of the
case."
2. The brief facts of the case which are necessary for
the disposal of this petition are that petitioner is the daughter
of respondent No.3. Out of love and affection towards the
petitioner, respondent No.3 executed a registered gift deed
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60035
WP No. 4039 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010072332024
dated 17.12.2009 in her favour in respect of the property
bearing Sy.No.257/1, measuring 1 acre 6 guntas, situated at
Mikeri Village, Kirugavulu Hobli, Malavalli Taluk, Mandya
District. Subsequently, the siblings of the petitioner also
executed a registered deed of confirmation dated 04.06.2010.
It is the case of the petitioner that, ever since the execution
and registration of the gift deed, she, along with her family
members, has been in possession and enjoyment of the subject
property.
3. Things stood thus, after a lapse of nearly 13 years
from the date of execution of the registered gift deed,
respondent No.3 filed an application before respondent No.1-
Assistant Commissioner under Section 5 and 23(1) of the
Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act,
2007 (for short, 'the Act, 2007'), seeking cancellation of the
aforesaid gift deed. Upon consideration of the oral and
documentary evidence available on record, respondent No.1-
Assistant Commissioner allowed the said application and
proceeded to cancel the registered gift deed by passing the
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60035
WP No. 4039 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010072332024
impugned order dated 16.11.2023. Aggrieved by the said
order, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner,
learned HCGP for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and learned counsel
for respondent No.3.
5. Apart from raising various other contentions, the
learned counsel for the petitioner primarily contended that
respondent No.3 had already instituted a civil suit in
O.S.No.480/2021 before the Court of the Civil Judge (Jr. Div.)
and JMFC, Malavalli, seeking the relief of re-conveyance of the
registered gift deed dated 17.12.2009. It is contended that,
while the said suit was pending consideration, respondent No.3
simultaneously initiated parallel proceedings under Section 5
and 23(1) of the Act, 2007, before the Assistant Commissioner,
seeking cancellation of the very same gift deed. The learned
counsel further contended that, despite the petitioner having
initially appeared before the Assistant Commissioner, owing to
the ill-health of her husband, she could neither appear before
the Assistant Commissioner on the subsequent dates of hearing
nor communicate the circumstances to her counsel. Without
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60035
WP No. 4039 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010072332024
extending sufficient opportunity to the petitioner, the Assistant
Commissioner proceeded to pass the impugned order.
Therefore, the learned counsel seeks to set aside the impugned
order and remand the matter to the Assistant Commissioner for
fresh consideration and adjudication, after affording reasonable
opportunity of hearing to both parties.
6. The prayer sought by the petitioner is vehemently
opposed by the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3
as well as the learned HCGP appearing for respondent Nos.1
and 2. Both the learned counsel, jointly submitted that, despite
sufficient opportunities having been afforded to the petitioner,
she failed to participate in the proceedings on the subsequent
dates of hearing. It is further contended that, though the
petitioner initially appeared before the Assistant Commissioner
and filed her statement of objections, she deliberately remained
absent on the subsequent dates of hearing and thereby failed
to avail the opportunities afforded to her. In such
circumstances, having been left with no other alternative, the
Assistant Commissioner proceeded to pass the impugned order.
They would further contend that the Assistant Commissioner,
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60035
WP No. 4039 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010072332024
upon due consideration of the documents available on record,
has passed a reasoned order, which does not warrant
interference by this Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction.
Accordingly, they seek dismissal of the writ petition.
7. I have given my anxious consideration to the
submission made by the learned counsel for the respective
parties and also perused the documents on record including the
impugned order passed by the Assistant Commissioner.
8. On careful scrutiny of the impugned order, it is
evident that, though the petitioner initially appeared before the
Assistant Commissioner and filed her statement of objections,
she subsequently remained absent. Accordingly, on
05.10.2023, the Assistant Commissioner issued summons to
the petitioner and posted the matter for further consideration
on 02.11.2023. On the said date, respondent No.3 remained
absent. Nevertheless, the Assistant Commissioner proceeded to
pass the impugned order, allowing the application filed by
respondent No.3. It is also not in dispute that respondent No.3
had already instituted a civil suit, as stated supra, seeking
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60035
WP No. 4039 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010072332024
substantially similar reliefs, which is pending consideration
before the competent Civil Court.
9. It is contended by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that the Assistant Commissioner ought to have taken
note of the pendency of the aforesaid civil suit instituted by
respondent No.3 in respect of the same subject matter. It is
further contended that the petitioner is in possession of
relevant documents to demonstrate that the application filed by
respondent No.3 was actuated by an ulterior motive. Since no
sufficient opportunity is granted to the petitioner, she could not
place all the relevant documents before the Assistant
Commissioner for consideration. It is also an admitted position
that the siblings of the petitioner had executed a registered
deed of confirmation dated 04.06.2010 in respect of the subject
property. Despite the same, the Assistant Commissioner has
proceeded to adjudicate the application without issuing notice
to the other siblings who had executed the said deed of
confirmation.
10. In the aforesaid circumstances, I am of the
considered view that the matter requires reconsideration at the
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60035
WP No. 4039 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010072332024
hands of the Assistant Commissioner, particularly in the
backdrop of the civil proceedings pending between the parties
and the registered deed of confirmation executed by the
siblings of the petitioner. The petitioner ought to be afforded a
reasonable opportunity to place all relevant documents and
materials on record so as to enable the Assistant Commissioner
to adjudicate the matter afresh, after considering the rival
contentions of the parties in accordance with law.
11. It is submitted by the learned counsel for
respondent No.3, the petitioner, having obtained an order of
injunction against respondent No.3, continues to remain in
possession and enjoyment of the subject property. He would
further contend that there is every likelihood of the petitioner
alienating the subject property during the pendency of the
proceedings upon remand, thereby giving rise to complications
in the matter. The apprehension expressed by respondent
No.3, in this regard, can be suitably addressed by directing the
petitioner not to alienate or create any third-party rights over
the subject property until the Assistant Commissioner disposes
- 9 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:60035
WP No. 4039 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010072332024
of the application upon remand. Accordingly, I proceed to pass
the following:
O R D E R
allowed
i. The writ petition is .
ii. The impugned order dated
16.11.2023 passed in Case
No.MSC/106/2022 by the Assistant
Commissioner is hereby set aside.
iii. The matter is remitted back to the
Assistant Commissioner for fresh
consideration.
iv. All the contention of the parties are
left open.
v. Until disposal of the application, the
petitioner shall not alienate the subject
property and respondent No.3 is at liberty
to file a necessary application for interim
maintenance by the petitioner.
SD/-
(RAJESH RAI K)
JUDGE
CR/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15