SMT BHAGYASHREE vs STATE OF KARNATAKA
- Court
- Karnataka High Court
- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58824
WP No. 12972 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010272432024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 16 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
WRIT PETITION NO.12972 OF 2024 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
SMT. BHAGYASHREE
W/O LATE SRI. NARAYANA SWAMY,
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS,
R/AT GOLLAGERI ROAD,
GANJAM VILLAGE,
SRIRANGAPATNA TOWN,
SRIRANGAPATTANA TALUK – 571 477.
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. AJAY N., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. MITHUN G.A., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
UNDER SECRETARY TO
THE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU – 560 001.
2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
PARK ROAD 2,
PES COLLEGE CAMPUS,
NEAR DISTRICT COURT,
MANDYA, KARNATAKA – 571 401.
3. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER & THE PRESIDENT
THE COUNCIL FOR MAINTENANCE,
PROTECTION AND MANAGEMENT OF
SENIOR CITIZENS,
PANDAVAPURA SUB DIVISION,
(THE MAINTENANCE, PROTECTION,
AND MANAGEMENT COUNCIL
Digitally signed by
MAHALAKSHMI B M
Location: High Court
of Karnataka
- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58824
WP No. 12972 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010272432024
FOR SENIOR CITIZENS)
PANDAVAPURA – 571 434.
4. CHIEF MUNICIPAL OFFICER
TALUK OFFICE,
SRIRANGAPATNA,
KARNATAKA – 571438.
5. TAHSILDAR
GRADE -2,
OFFICE AT ASST. COMMISSIONER,
PANDAVAPURA SUB DIVISION,
SH 19, THYAGARAJA COLONY,
PANDAVAPURA,
KARNATAKA – 571 434.
6. SMT. MALAMMA
W/O LATE SRI RAMAYA,
AGED ABOUT 90 YEARS,
R/AT GOLLAGERI ROAD,
GANJAMGRAMA,
SRIRANGAPATNA TOWN,
SRIRANGAPATNA TALUK – 571 438.
7. SMT. PRAMEELA
W/O LATE NAGANNA,
AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS,
R/AT GOLLAGERI ROAD,
GANJAMGRAMA,
SRIRANGAPATNA TOWN,
SRIRANGAPATTANA TALUK – 571 438.
8. SMT. RATHNAMMA
W/O LATE SRINIVAS,
AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
R/AT GOLLAGERI ROAD,
GANJAM GRAMA,
SRIRANGAPATNA TOWN,
SRIRANGAPATTANA TALUK – 571 438.
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. POOJA M. KOORSE, HCGP FOR R-1 TO R-3 & R-5;
SRI. H.C. SHIVARAMU, ADVOCATE FOR R-4 (V/C);
NOTICE TO R-6 TO R-8 IS SERVED & UNREPRESENTED)
- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58824
WP No. 12972 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010272432024
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF
CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR
DIRECTION, QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 13.07.2023
PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 IN HI.NAA.PO.C.R.04/2023-24 VIDE
ANNEXURE-A; AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’
GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
ORAL ORDER
1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition impugning
the order dated 13.07.2023 [ impugned order ] passed by the
Assistant Commissioner and President, the Council for
Maintenance, Protection and Management of Senior Citizens,
Pandavapura [ respondent No.3 ], whereby the application filed by
respondent No.6 seeking cancellation of the registered gift deed in
respect of Municipal Katha No.G-1397/4028 measuring East to
West 20 feet, North to South 27 feet with complete Mangalore tiled
house situated at Gollageri Street, Ganjam Village, Srirangapattana
Taluk [ schedule property ] in favour of petitioner’s husband, late
Narayanaswamy was allowed.
- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58824
WP No. 12972 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010272432024
Brief facts:
2. The petitioner is the wife of Narayanaswamy, who is the son
of Mallamma [ respondent No.6 ]. Late Ramaya, the husband of
respondent No.6 had six children, and Naryanaswamy is one of
their sons. Respondent No.6 executed a registered gift deed on
31.12.2003 in respect of the schedule property in favour of her son,
Narasyana Swamy. Pursuant to the execution of the gift deed, the
katha was mutated in the name of Narayanaswamy.
3. The husband of petitioner Narayanaswamy died on
03.06.2018. Upon his demise, the name of the petitioner and her
children came to be entered in the revenue records in respect of
the schedule property. The petitioner instituted suit in O.S.
No.153/2023 before the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC (Jr. Dn),
Srirangapatna for permanent injunction restraining respondent
No.6 from interfering with her possession and enjoyment of the
schedule property.
4. Subsequently, respondent No.6 filed an application before
respondent No.3 under Sections 4, 5 and 23 of the Maintenance
and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 [ the Act ]
- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58824
WP No. 12972 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010272432024
seeking cancellation of the registered gift deed executed in favour
of her son, late Narayanaswamy and claiming compensation of
`
20,000/-. Respondent No.3, by the impugned order, directed
respondent No.4-Chief Municipal Officer to register the katha of the
schedule property in the name of respondent No.6. Aggrieved by
the same, the petitioner is before this Court in this writ petition.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner principally
contends that respondent No.6 executed the registered gift deed in
favour of late Narayanaswamy on 31.12.2003, whereas, the Act
came into force on 29.12.2007 and in terms of the provisions of
Section 23 of the Act, the application under Section 23 of the Act
cannot be invoked in respect of a transfer effected prior to the
commencement of the Act.
6. Though notice was served on respondent No.6 on
27.01.2025, no representation has been made on her behalf.
7. It is not in dispute that respondent No.6 executed a
registered gift deed in favor of late Narayanaswamy, the
petitioner’s husband on 31.12.2003, which was before the Act
- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58824
WP No. 12972 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010272432024
came into force. The Act came into force with effect from
29.12.2007.
8. Section 23 of the Act reads as under:
“ 23. Transfer of property to be void in certain
circumstances.– (1) Where any senior citizen who, after
the commencement of this Act, has transferred by way of
gift or otherwise, his property, subject to the condition that
the transferee shall provide the basic amenities and basic
physical needs to the transferor and such transferee refuses
or fails to provide such amenities and physical needs, the
said transfer of property shall be deemed to have been
made by fraud or coercion or under undue influence and
shall at the option of the transferor be declared void by the
Tribunal.
(2) Where any senior citizen has a right to receive
maintenance out of an estate and such estate or part
thereof is transferred, the right to receive maintenance may
be enforced against the transferee if the transferee has
notice of the right, or if the transfer is gratuitous; but not
against the transferee for consideration and without notice
of right.
(3) If, any senior citizen is incapable of enforcing
the rights under sub-sections (1) and (2), action may be
taken on his behalf by any of the organisation referred to in
Explanation to sub-section (1) of section 5.”
9. A plain reading of the Section 23 of the Act indicates that the
provision contemplates a transfer of property by a senior citizen
after the commencement of the Act, subject to conditions stipulated
therein. Consequently, the provision cannot be invoked to
- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58824
WP No. 12972 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010272432024
invalidate a gift deed executed prior to the commencement of the
Act.
10. In the present case, the registered gift deed in favour of the
petitioner’s husband was executed on 31.12.2003, much prior to
the commencement of the Act. Therefore, respondent No.3 lacked
jurisdiction to entertain the application filed by respondent No.6
seeking cancellation of the said gift deed under Section 23 of the
Act.
11. The Division Bench of this Court, in the case of Smt. C.
1
Kamalamma Vs. Sri P. Gopal and others , while dealing with a
similar issue, considered the applicability of Section 23 of the Act to
registered gift deeds executed prior to its commencement and held
that the provision could not be invoked in respect of such transfer.
12. In light of the legal position, the impugned order passed by
respondent No.3 cannot be sustained, as the authority lacked
jurisdiction to entertain the application in respect of a registered gift
deed executed prior to the commencement of the Act. Therefore,
the impugned order is liable to be set aside, since respondent No.3
1
W.A. No.1170/2021 (GM-RES) D.D. 16.11.2021
- 8 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:58824
WP No. 12972 of 2024
CNR: KAHC010272432024
had no jurisdiction to entertain the petition in respect of the
registered gift deed executed before the commencement of the Act.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed .
13. The impugned order dated 13.07.2023 passed by
respondent No.3 is hereby set aside .
14. It is, however, clarified that this order shall not come in the
way of respondent No.6 from seeking redressal of her grievance, in
accordance with law, before the competent Civil Court.
15. In light of the order being set aside, the concerned
authorities are directed to restore the name of the petitioner in the
revenue records in accordance with law.
Sd/-
_____________________
JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
MBM
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6