- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1713 WP No. 101466 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 101466 OF 2022 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: BALU S/O. DEEPANNA ASANGI, AGE. 57 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. SAVALAGI, TQ. JAMKHANDI, DIST. BAGALKOT- 587301. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. GIRISH A. YADAWAD, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. BAHU S/O. NEMANNA KAWATEKAR, AGE. 86 YEARS, OCC. NIL, R/O. SAVALAGI, TQ. JAMKHANDI, DIST. BAGALKOT- 587 301. 2. MAHAVEER S/O. BHAU KAWATEKAR, AGE. 29 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. SAVALAGI, TQ. JAMKHANDI, DIST. BAGALKOT- 587 301. 3. SMT. SUNANDA W/O. ADAGOND PATIL, PRESENTLY KNOWN AS Digitally signed by VISHAL NINGAPPA PATTIHAL Location: High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, Dharwad - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1713 WP No. 101466 of 2022 SMT. SUNANDA W/O. BALAPPA ASANGI, R/O. SAVALAGI, TQ. JAMKHANDI, DIST. BAGALKOT- 587 301. 4. SHRIDHAR S/O. MAHAVEER NARASAGOND, AGE. 31 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/O. ALAGUR, TQ. JAMKHANDI, DIST. BAGALKOT- 587 301. 5. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, JAMKHANDI ALSO THE MAINTENANCE TRIBUNAL UNDER THE MAINTENANCE AND WELFARE OF PARENTS AND SENIOR CITIZENS ACT, 2007, COURT COMPOUND, JAMAKHANDI, DIST. BAGALKOT- 587 301. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI SHARAD V. MAGADUM, AGA FOR R5, SRI J.S. SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R1, SRI ANIL KALE, ADVOCATE FOR R4, NOTICE TO R2 AND R3 ARE SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA IS PRAYING TO ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY SUCH WRIT OR DIRECTION TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 10.02.2022 PASSED BY THE MAINTENANCE TRIBUNAL/RESPONDENT NO.5 IN NO.MISC/HI/NA/CR/09/2021-22 VIDE ANNEXURE-D. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1713 WP No. 101466 of 2022 ORAL ORDER (PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA) The petitioner is before this Court calling in question an order dated 10.02.2022 passed by the Tribunal constituted under Senior Citizens Act i.e., the Assistant Commissioner. 2. Heard Sri Girish A. Yadawad, learned counsel for petitioner, Sri J.S. Shetty, learned counsel for respondent No.1, Sri Anil Kale, learned counsel for respondent No.4 and Sri Sharad V. Magadum, learned AGA for respondent No.5. 3. The facts in brief germane are as follows: The third respondent is said to have executed a registered gift deed in favour of the petitioner gifting the subject property to the hands of the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner is said to have become the owner of the property and his name is also entered into the Record of Rights. The history to the gift appears to be from the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1713 WP No. 101466 of 2022 hands of the first respondent travelled to the third respondent. 4. The first respondent-father of the second respondent and father-in-law of the present petitioner approaches the Assistant Commissioner on 21.09.2021 seeking the re-entry of his name into the Record of Rights of the subject land that was projected before the Tribunal alleging that the husband and wife have not been taken care of by the donee of the property, the petitioner herein. The petitioner was not made a party to the proceedings. The Tribunal allows the application filed before it and directs that the entry in the Record of Rights be restored in favour of the first respondent, the father, and that would remain during his lifetime. The said order is in challenge before this Court. Interim order was initially refused which was challenged before the Division Bench and Division Bench grants an interim order of stay and makes it subject to the outcome of the present petition. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1713 WP No. 101466 of 2022 5. The learned counsel Sri Girish A. Yadawad appearing for the petitioner submits that the first respondent who had approached the Tribunal is no more today. Therefore, none of the rights that flew from the order, in which, the first respondent was the applicant should not be allowed to remain. He would submit that all the members of the family are before the civil Court in O.S.No.80/2022 and the rights should be agitated before the said forum. 6. The counsel for the first respondent Sri J.S. Shetty would admit the fact that the father is no more but would make a weak attempt to seek that the wife should be impleaded as a party respondent in the subject petition and would submit that a perusal at the complaint would indicate that husband and wife both were ill-treated by the children and therefore, the petition should not be disposed on the score that the first respondent is no more. 7. The learned counsel Sri Anil Kale representing the fourth respondent would toe the lines of the present - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1713 WP No. 101466 of 2022 petitioner in contending that the parties are before the civil Court and they will agitate their rights before the civil Court. 8. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions of the learned counsel for parties and perused the material on record. 9. The aforenarrated facts are not in dispute. The Act is created for the purpose of benefit of the senior citizens and empowers a senior citizen to knock at the doors of the Assistant Commissioner on the grievance or whatever grievance of manifold nature. One such grievance that was projected by the senior citizen-first respondent herein before the Tribunal was with regard to an alleged mutation entry that was made in favour of the petitioner in terms of a gift deed. The complaint before the Assistant Commissioner was of the senior citizen-first respondent was, the children are not taking care of his needs and have got the property mutated in their own names. It is to be noticed that the present petitioner was - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1713 WP No. 101466 of 2022 not even made a party before the Tribunal. The Tribunal passes an order protecting the rights of the senior citizen till he is alive or during his lifetime. The order reads as follows : “DzÉñÀ ¦ÃpPÉAiÀÄ°è ZÀað¹zÀAvÉ ¥Àæ¸ÀÄÛvÀ ¸ÁªÀ¼ÀV UÁæªÀÄzÀ j¸À£ÀA. 133/1 PÉëÃvÀæ 5-36 J.UÀÄ. j¸À £ÀA 133/2 PÉëÃvÀæ 5-35 J.UÀÄ. ºÁUÀÆ j¸À £ÀA 133/3 PÉëÃvÀæ-11-30 J.UÀÄ d«ÄãÀ£ÀÄß zÀÆgÀÄzÁgÀgÁzÀ ¨sÁªÀÅ £ÉêÀÄtÚ PÀªÀmÉÃPÀgÀ EªÀgÀ ºÉ¸Àj£À°è (CªÀgÀ ºÀAiÀiÁwªÀjUÉ ªÀiÁvÀæ) zÁR°¸À®Ä vÀºÀ²Ã¯ÁÝgÀ dªÀÄRAr EªÀjUÉ ¥Á®PÀgÀ ¥ÉÇõÀuÉ ¸ÀAgÀPÀëuÉ ºÁUÀÆ »jAiÀÄ £ÁUÀjPÀgÀ gÀPÀëuÉ PÁAiÉÄÝ 2007 gÀ PÀ®A 23 gÀr DzÉò¹zÉ. F DzÉñÀªÀ£ÀÄß ¨ÉgÀ¼ÀZÀÄÑUÁgÀjUÉ GPÀÛ¯ÉÃT¹, UÀtQÃPÀÈvÀ ¥Àæw ¥Àj²Ã°¹ wzÀÄÝ¥ÀrUÀ¼À£ÀÄß zsÀÈrÃPÀj¹ EAzÀÄ ¢£ÁAPÀ 10-09-2022 gÀAzÀÄ §»gÀAUÀ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ°è WÉÆö¹zÉ.” 10. It transpires that the first respondent now has died in 09.10.2024. Therefore, the order that was to be in operation during the lifetime of the first respondent would automatically cease on his death which is on 09.10.2024. Thus, the benefit that was rendered to a senior citizen first respondent undoubtedly vanishes on his death. The siblings or the children are in a squabble with regard to property. The forum for resolution of the said dispute is not before the Assistant Commissioner, nor in furtherance - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1713 WP No. 101466 of 2022 of the order of the Assistant Commissioner, it should be before a civil competent Civil Court, rightly the family members are before the competent civil Court in O.S.No.80/2022. They are at liberty to agitate all their rights before the before the civil Court. In the light of the order impugned having its life only up to the lifetime of the senior citizen and he breathing his last the order also should breathe its last. Therefore, the order which was limited, cannot give unlimited benefit to others. Wherefore, the order is now to be obliterated and all the consequential action taken on the strength of the order would also be obliterated. 11. For the aforesaid reasons, the following : ORDER (i) The Writ Petition is allowed. (ii) The order dated 10.02.2022 passed by the Maintenance Tribunal in No.MSC/Hi.Na/CR/09/2021- 22 vide Annexure-D, stands quashed. (iii) Any action taken pursuant to the order or on the strength of the order shall be restored. Status quo - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:1713 WP No. 101466 of 2022 ante which will however remain subject to the result of the civil suit pending in O.S.No.80/2022. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE NAA List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8