- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45526 WP No. 658 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 658 OF 2022 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. PURUSHOTHAM L AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS, S/O M LAKSHMINARAYANA SWAMY 2. SRUTHI AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, W/O PURUSHOTHAM L BOTH ARE RESIDING AT NO.32, GROUND FLOOR, 3RD MAIN, 3RD CROSS, BANAGIRINAGARA, NEAR KIMS COLLEGE BSK 3RD STAGE, BENGALURU- 85. 3. PALAKSHA L AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, S/O M LAKSHMINARAYAN SWAMY R/AT NO.32, FIRST FLOOR, 3RD MAIN, 3RD CROSS, BANAGIRINAGARA, NEAR KIMS COLLEGE, BSK 3RD STAGE, BENGALURU-85. …PETITIONERS (BY SMT. ADITHI B MADHUSUDAN, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SAMPATH A., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, VIDHANA SOUDHA, AMBEDKAR VEEDI, BENGALURU-560 001. Digitally signed by ARUNKUMAR M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45526 WP No. 658 of 2022 2. THE TRIBUNAL OF MAINTENANCE AND WELFARE OF PARENTS AND SENIOR CITIZEN AND ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU SOUTH SUB DIVISION BENGALURU-560 001. 3. M.LAKSHMINARAYANA SWAMY S/O LATE MUNI NAJAPPA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS, R/AT NO.32, 3RD MAIN, 3RD CROSS, BANAGIRINAGARA, NEAR KIMS COLLEGE, BANASHANKARI 3RD STAGE, BENGALURU-85. 4. BHAGYA AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, W/O PALAKSHA R/AT NO.32, 3RD MAIN, 3RD CROSS, BANAGIRINAGARA, NEAR KIMS COLLEGE, BANASHANIKARI 3RD STAGE, BENGALURU-85. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR, AGA FOR R1 AND R2; SRI. T.R.RAJAGOPAL FOR R3; R4 SERVED) THIS W.P. FILED IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DTD.15.11.2021 VIDE ANNEXURE-A PASSED BY THE R-2 IN MSC/SC/CR/53/2020-21. 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 - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45526 WP No. 658 of 2022 ORAL ORDER In this petition, the petitioners are assailing the order dated 15.11.2021 (Annexure-A) passed by respondent No.2. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. In this petition, the petitioners are claiming to be the children of respondent No.3. However, Respondent No.3 is disputing that the petitioners are not related to him. 4. In this regard, I have carefully examined the averments made in the petition filed by respondent No.3 herein before Respondent No.2, wherein the relationship between Respondent No. 3 and petitioner No.1 is disputed. Hence, I am of the view that, as there is a dispute with regard to the relationship between the parties, Respondent No.2 has no jurisdiction to entertain the petition under the Provisions of Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. Accordingly, I find no fault in the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as to the fact that, Respondent No. 2 has no jurisdiction to entertain the petition. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:45526 WP No. 658 of 2022 5. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The order dated 15.11.2021 (Annexure-A) passed by respondent No.2 is hereby set aside. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE rs List No.: 1 Sl No.: 37