- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34128 WP No. 14144 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 14144 OF 2024 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. BHARTHI D/W SOMASHEKARAIAH K W/O A V DINESH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/O CHANDANA TRAVELS ALDURU VILLAGE, FRONT OF GANAPATHI TEMPLE CHIKKAMAGALURU TALUK AND DISTRICT 577201. 2. K.SIDDAMMA W/O SOMASHEKARAIAH K AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS R/O CHANNARAYAPATNA B M ROAD, FRONT OF DATTRAYA COLLAGE CHANNARAYAPATNA TOWN HASSAN DISRICT 576 201. 3. S KUMARA S/O SOMASHEKARIAH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS R/O FRONT OF TIMES P U COLLEGE CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34128 WP No. 14144 of 2024 HASSAN DISTRICT-573201 …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. GIRISH B BALADARE.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. K. SOMASHEKARAIAH. K S/O D KRISHNAPPA AGED ABOUT 81 YEARS R/O FRONT OF TIMES P U COLLEGE CHANNARAYAPATNA TALUK HASSAN DIST-573201 AND ALSO R/O NO.05 P.K.IN FRONT OF SANATORIUM K.E.R ROAD, MYSORE 570020. 2. PRESIDENT MAINTENANCE AND WELFARE OF SENIOR CITIZEN TRIBUNAL AND ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER HASSAN SUB DIVISION HASSAN 573201. 3. APPELLANT TRIBUNAL MAINTENANCE AND WELFARE OF SENIOR CITIZEN AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE COURT, REPRESENTED BY DEPUTY COMMISSIONER HASSAN DISTRICT HASSAN 573 201. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. H M UMESH.,ADVOCATE FOR R1; - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34128 WP No. 14144 of 2024 SMT. NAVYA SHEKHAR, AGA FOR R2 & R3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTIONS OR ORDER TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 17/08/2023 PASSED BY R3 IN MAG (HINARA) 21/2022-23 THAT IS, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MAINTENANCE AND WELFARE OF SENIOR CITIZEN AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE COURT, HASSAN DISTRICT, HASSAN IN AS PER ANNEXURE-H. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD ORAL ORDER The petitioners are the children of the first respondent, and they are parties to the proceedings under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007[ for short ‘the Act’]. The first respondent was unsuccessful in the application with the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner, but he has succeeded in the appeal with the Appellate Tribunal [the third respondent]. The proceedings with - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34128 WP No. 14144 of 2024 the third respondent is in No.21/2022-23, and the third respondent's impugned order is dated 17.08.2023. The operative portion of the third respondent's order reads as under: ªÉÄîä£À«zÁgÀgÀ ªÉÄîä£À«AiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¨sÁUÀ±ÀB ¥ÀÄgÀ¸ÀÌj¹zÉ. CfðzÁgÀjAzÀ ¥ÀÆgÀPÀ zÁR¯ÉUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¥ÀqÉzÀÄ ¤AiÀĪÀiÁ£ÀĸÁgÀ E SÁvÉ zÁR®Ä ªÀiÁqÀ®Ä ¥ÀAZÁ¬Äw C©üªÀÈ¢Þ C¢üPÁj UÀÄ®¹AzÀ gÀªÀjUÉ ¸ÀÆa¹zÉ. This Court, on 31.05.2024, has stayed the operation of the third respondent's order. 2. It is undisputed that the first respondent has purchased a total extent of 10 guntas in Survey No.36/2 of Kerechikkenahalli, Kasaba Hobli, Channarayapatna [‘the Subject Property’]. The first petitioner has commenced a suit in OS No.125/2018 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Channarayapatna that has culminated in a compromise decree. The petitioners and the first respondent have agreed to divide the subject property, which comprises residential constructions, - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34128 WP No. 14144 of 2024 by metes and bounds as described in the schedule appended to the compromise petition. 3. The first respondent has applied under the Act referring to a certain gift deed executed by him under duress contending that he was under compulsion to vacate the premises in his possession. The third respondent, while examining the merits of the first respondent's appeal as against the second respondent's order dated 25.05.2019, has referred to certain transactions that are prior to the decree while issuing directions as aforesaid. Sri Girish B. Baladare, the learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the third respondent has intervened because of a purported gift deed which is not brought on record and that this order has the effect of nullifying the terms of the compromise. The learned Counsel is categorical that the respective possession is as agreed. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34128 WP No. 14144 of 2024 4. Sri. H. M. Umesh, the learned counsel for the first respondent, is heard in the light of these circumstances and the petitioner's grievance. The learned counsel cannot undermine the efficacy of the compromise decree. In fact when queried, the learned counsel is categorical that the last of the transaction is in terms of the compromise decree in OS No.125 of 2018. 5. This Court is of the view that the third respondent's direction to the Panchayat Development Officer [PDO] concerned to examine the records and issue orders for e-Katha must be examined in the light of the decree unless the person, who is allotted a specific portion, has executed another permissible transaction. If the PDO acts in terms of this observation while implementing the third respondent's order, there should be no grievance. As such, the writ petition stands disposed of observing that the concerned PDO, in issuing e-Katha at the - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34128 WP No. 14144 of 2024 instance of the first respondent, shall ensure that it is under the terms of the compromise decree. As regards the first respondent's claim that he is financially neglected, this Court is of the view that no interference is justified because undisputedly he was in government service and upon superannuation he is receiving a pension and stays with his second wife and their children. Sd/- (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE SA ct:sr