- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50910 WP No. 29068 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 29068 OF 2023 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: SRI R CHANDRA NAIK S/O LATE RAMA NAIK, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, RAMANI NILAYA, VINAYAKA NAGAR, 3RD CROSS, WARD NO. 14, MANJUNATH NAGAR MAIN ROAD, BAGALAGUNTE, BENGALURU 560 070. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRAKASH K N., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SENIOR CITIZEN CARE AND MAINTENANCE MANAGEMENT TRIBUNAL AND THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, HASSAN DISTRICT, HASSAN - 573 201. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND PRESIDENT MAIN TENANCE TRIBUNAL HASSAN SUB DIVISION, HASSAN DISTRICT, HASSAN - 573 201. 3. SMT P M OMKARAMMA W/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, (WRONGLY CLAIMED AS W/O R CHANDRA NAIK) AGE NOT KNOWN, R/AT MADALU VILLAGE, KANAKATTE HOBLI, ARASIKERE TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 103. Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court Of Karnatka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50910 WP No. 29068 of 2023 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR, AGA FOR R1 AND R2, SRI. LAKSHMIKANTH .K, ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEARING NO. MAG (HI. NARA) 25/2022-23 DATED 01/08/2023 BY THE R1, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, HASSAN DISTRICT, PRODUCED AS 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 MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH ORAL ORDER Heard learned counsel appearing for both parties. 2. In this writ petition, the petitioner is assailing order dated 01.08.2023 passed by respondent No.1 (Annexure-A) and order dated 22.02.2022 passed by respondent No.2 (Annexure –B). 3. Sri.K.N. Prakash, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is having dispute with the respondent No.3 and further the entire proceedings before the respondent No.2 is made without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as the petitioner was placed ex-parte. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50910 WP No. 29068 of 2023 The petitioner also has not received notice from the respondent No.2. Accordingly sought for interference of this court. 4. Per contra, Sri.Lakshmikanth K., learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3 submitted that the respondent No.3 is the wife of the petitioner and therefore respondent- authorities have rightly ordered maintenance in favour of respondent No.3 and therefore, sought to justify the impugned orders. 5. Sri. Mahantesh Shetthar, learned AGA appearing for the respondents No.1 and 2 also sought to justify the impugned orders at Annexure A and B respectively. 6. Having taken note of the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, it is forthcoming from the proceedings that in Hi.Na.Ra.19/19-20 before the respondent No.2, wherein the petitioner herein has not been heard and has been placed ex-parte before the competent authority. It is also to be noted from the observation made by the respondent No.1 at Annexure A, wherein the petitioner is contending that the petitioner has married one G Kanakabai and her name has been mentioned in the service records. That - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50910 WP No. 29068 of 2023 apart, the petitioner is having two children and accordingly disputed the marriage with respondent No.3. 7. In that view of the matter, I am of the view that, respondent-authorities ought not to have accepted the petition under the provisions of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (herein after referred to as ‘Act’). 8. In view of the fact that the petitioner has disputed the relationship with the respondent No.3, it is open for respondent No.3 to establish her relationship with the petitioner in a manner known to law. It is also to be noted that the object of the Act is to provide effective provision for maintenance and welfare of parents and senior citizens guaranteed and recognized under the Constitution and for matters connected therein and incident thereto. As the petitioner herein has disputed the relationship with respondent No.3, I am of the view that, the entire proceedings before respondents No.1 and 2 is non-est and accordingly same are hereby quashed. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50910 WP No. 29068 of 2023 The impugned orders passed by the respondents No.1 and 2 are hereby set aside. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE AKV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 45