- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:2937 WP No. 200541 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT PETITION NO.200541 OF 2023 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: SMT. SAPNA W/O RAJSHEKHAR MANGALAGI, AGED ABOUT: 38 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O H.NO.9-586/39, VIJAYNAGAR COLONY, ALAND ROAD, KALABURAGI-585102. …PETITIONER (BY SMT. SAPNA R. MANGALGI - PARTY IN PERSON) AND: 1. SHIVASHARANAPPA S/O LATE. SHIVALINGAPPA MANGALAGI, DECEASED THROUGH HIS LRS AND OTHERS I) SMT. PUSHPAVATI W/O LATE. SHIVASHARANAPPA MANGALAGI, AGE: 70 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: H.NO. 9-586/39, VIJAYNAGAR COLONY, ALAND ROAD, KALABURAGI-585102. II) SHIVARAJ S/O LATE. SHIVASHARANAPPA MANGALAGI, AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC: PROFESSOR IN PDA COLLEGE, R/O: LAWYERS COLONY, BEHIND ASIAN MALL, KALABURAGI-585102. Digitally signed by LUCYGRACE Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:2937 WP No. 200541 of 2023 III) SHASHIDHAR S/O LATE. SHIVASHARANAPPA MANAGALAGI, AGE: 57 YEARS, OCC: GOVT. SERVANT, R/O 343, 10TH MAIN NTI LAYOUT, VIDYARANPURAM BENGALURU NORTH-01. IV) SHEELA W/O SATISH @ STYAKUMAR SHANKAR, D/O LATE. SHIVASHARANAPPA, AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O A1/19 JAYARANCHOD SOCIETY, NEAR APEXA CHAR RASTA MD ROAD, VADODHAR, GUJARATH STATE-380001. V) SARAWATI W/O SIDDANNA KAMARADAGI, D/O LATE. SHIVASHARANAPPA, AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O: BESIDE DR.TA PATIL HOSPITAL, ANAND NAGAR, KALABURAGI-585102. VI) SUNANDA W/O RAJUKUMAR PATIL, D/O LATE. SHIVASHARANAPPA, AGE: 51 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD, R/O PARVATI NILAYA GODUTAI NAGAR, KALABURAGI-585102. VII) SURYAKANTH S/O LATE. SHIVASHARANAPPA MANAGALAGI, AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: PVT. COMPANY, R/O PUNE (MAHARASHTRA STATE)-411001. 2. RAJESHEKHAR S/O LATE. SHIVASHARANAPPA MANGALAGI, AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: WORKING, R/O: H.NO. 9-586/39 VIJAYANAGAR COLONY, ALAND ROAD, KALABURAGI-585102. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KALABURAGI AND DISTRICT MAGISTRATE KALABURAGI, MINI VIDHAN SOUDHA, KALABURAGI-585102. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:2937 WP No. 200541 of 2023 4. SENIOR CITIZEN MAINTENANCE TRIBUNAL AND ASST. COMMISSIONER SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, KALABURAGI-585102. SUB-DIVISION, KALABURAGI-585102. 5. THE TAHASILDAR KALABURAGI TALUKA, DIST. KALABURAGI-585102. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. KRUPA SAGAR PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1(1); SRI. DEEPAK V. BARAD, ADVOCATE FOR R2; SRI. GOPALKRISHNA B. YADAV, HCGP FOR R3 TO R5; NOTICE TO R1 (II) AND R1(VII) ARE SERVED; V/O DATED 29.03.2023 NOTICE TO IN R/O R1(III) AND R1(V); AND V/O DATED 27.06.2023 NOTICE TO IN R/O R1(IV) AND R1(VI) IS HELD SUFFICIENT) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO KINDLY ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF THE CERTIORARI AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 04.05.2022 FILE APPEAL NO. ¸ÀA/PÀA/JªÀiï.J.f./07/2022-23, WHICH IS PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-M AND SUBSEQUENTLY SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 20.01.2020 IN APPEAL NO. ¸ÀA/PÀAzÁAiÀÄ/»Ã£Á/03/2019-20 WHICH IS PRODUCED HEREWITH ANNEXURE-F PASSED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT AND 4TH RESPONDENT AND THE 3RD RESPONDENT AUTHORITY AS ILLEGAL AND ARBITRARY IS AGAINST THE LAW. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:2937 WP No. 200541 of 2023 THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL ORDER (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN) Aggrieved by the order passed in Appeal No.¸ÀA/PÀAzÁAiÀÄ/»Ã£Á/03/2019-20, dated 20.01.2020 by the respondent No.4 vide Annexure-F to the writ petition and also the order passed in Appeal No. ¸ÀA/PÀA/JªÀÄ.J.f/07/2022- 23, dated 04.05.2022 by the respondent No.3-Deputy Commissioner Kalaburagi vide Annexure-M to the writ petition, the present writ petition is filed. 2. Petitioner was married to respondent No.2. The house property which is the subject matter of the writ petition was owned by the late father-in-law of the petitioner. After his demise, his wife is said to have inherited the same by a will. However, the same is disputed by the petitioner. The petitioner and respondent - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:2937 WP No. 200541 of 2023 No.2 had differences and it resulted in divorce proceedings initiated by respondent No.2-husband. The same has been granted by the Family Court and confirmed by this Court in MFA No.200137/2020. The petitioner submits that she has challenged the same before the Hon'ble Apex Court. However, no interim orders are said to have been passed in the said proceedings pending before the Apex Court. The petitioner herein has not been granted any maintenance in the divorce proceedings. In the meanwhile, the petitioner preferred a case under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, which is said to be pending. The petitioner had also initiated proceedings under Section 498-A of IPC against her husband and in-laws, wherein they have been acquitted. 3. The dispute between the petitioner and respondent No.2 affected the late father-in-law of the petitioner and respondent No.1(i), who is her mother-in- law. On the ground that the petitioner and respondent - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:2937 WP No. 200541 of 2023 No.2 are not allowing them to live peacefully in their own house, proceedings have been initiated before respondent No.4 and the impugned order dated 20.01.2020 vide Annexure-F has been passed, wherein it is ordered that the petitioner herein has to deliver back the property in favour of the late father-in-law of the petitioner herein. This was challenged by the petitioner before respondent No.3-Deputy Commissioner, who has passed the impugned order at Annexure-M to the writ petition, wherein the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner at Annexure-F has been upheld. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed. 4. The case of the petitioner is that, she is the ex-wife of respondent No.2 and her in-laws initiated the proceedings before the Assistant Commissioner with the sole intention of defeating her rights and the impugned orders have been passed erroneously. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:2937 WP No. 200541 of 2023 5. Per contra, the respondents submit that the property in question is the self-acquired property of the late father-in-law of the petitioner and he has bequeathed the same in favour of his wife i.e., respondent No.1(i) herein, who is the mother-in-law of the petitioner and that petitioner has no right, title and interest over the property concerned. It is further submitted that a decree of divorce has been granted in favour of respondent No.2 against the petitioner herein and the same has been confirmed by this Court in MFA No.200137/2020 and though the petitioner is contending that the same is challenged before the Apex Court, no interim orders have been passed in favour of the petitioner herein. On the said grounds, it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to dismiss the writ petition. 6. Admittedly, the present proceedings are against the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. On the ground that the property is the self acquired property of the late - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:2937 WP No. 200541 of 2023 father-in- law of the petitioner and he has bequeathed the same in favour of respondent No.1(i) (mother-in-law of the petitioner) and that the petitioner herein has prevented her father-in-law and mother-in-law to reside peacefully in their own property, the impugned orders have been passed. Admittedly, the petitioner has no independent right, title or interest on the property concerned. Under the said circumstances, no fault can be found in the impugned orders. 7. The present proceedings pertains only in respect of the rights of the deceased father-in-law of the petitioner and her mother-in-law. If petitioner has got any right to reside in the property as per the orders passed by the Court under the Protection of Women form Domestic Violence Act or under any maintenance sanctioned by any Court, the impugned orders will not come in her way. Admittedly, in the divorce proceedings, no right has been granted in favour of the petitioner in respect of the property concerned. In the proceedings under the - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:2937 WP No. 200541 of 2023 Protection of Women form Domestic Violence Act, there is a dispute as to whether there is any right is conferred in favour of the petitioner or not in respect of the property. 8. For the aforementioned reasons, the writ petition is hereby dismissed subject to the observation made herein supra. Sd/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE SMP/LG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 45 CT:SI