- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28275 WP No. 19353 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 19353 OF 2022 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: RADHIKA CHANDRA SEKHAR D/O T PRABHAKARAN NAMBIAR @ T P NAMBIAR W/O MR B C CHANDRA SHEKHAR AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS PRESENTLY STATIONED AT NO.730 GROUND FLOOR, HAL 3RD STAGE IST BLOCK, 4TH MAIN, NEW TIPPASANDRA BANGALORE-560075. …PETITIONER (BY SMT PUSHPALATHA G, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. VIVEK HOLLA, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER THE BENGALURU DISTRICT MAINTENANCE AND WELFARE OF PARENTS AND SENIOR CITIZENS APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AND SPECIAL DEPUTY COMMISSIONER-1 KANDAYA BHAVANA, K G ROAD BANGALORE NORTH, SUB-DIVISION BANGALORE-560001. 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER MAINTENANCE TRIBUNA FOR WELFARE OF PARENTS AND SENIOR CITIZENS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BANGALORE NORTH, SUB DIVISION NO.200(N), 2ND FLOOR Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28275 WP No. 19353 of 2022 KANDAYA BHAVAN, K G ROAD BENGALURU-560001. 3. NISHA W/O LATE NANDAKUMAR AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS 4. AARADHANA D/O LATE NANDAKUMAR AGED ABOUT 8 YEARS 5. ANNAPURNA D/O LATE NANDAKUMAR AGED ABOUT 5 YEARS R4 & R5 ARE MINORS REP. BY NATURAL GUARDIAN MOTHER RESPONDENT NO.3 R3 TO R5 ARE R/A NO.730, FIRST FLOOR HAL 3RD STAGE, 1ST BLOCK 4TH MAIN, NEW TIPPASANDRA BANGALORE-560075. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.YASHIR ALI ., ADVOCATE FOR R3 TO R5: SRI SRINIVAS KUMAR, HCGP FOR R1 & R2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION O INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 18.08.2022 PASSED BY THE R1 IN MAG(4)SC/CR/09/2021-22 (ANNEXURE-J) AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28275 WP No. 19353 of 2022 ORAL ORDER This writ petition is by a daughter of donor, who had executed a Deed of Gift dated 27.08.2018 in favour of Donee, the husband of respondent No.3 being aggrieved by the order dated 18.08.2022 passed by the respondent No.1-Deputy Commissioner in exercise of his powers under Section 16 of the Maintenance and Welfare of the Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’ for short) whereby, the order dated 08.03.2021 passed by the respondent No.2-Assistant Commissioner cancelling said Deed of Gift in exercise of powers under Section 23 of the Act, has been set aside. 2. Brief facts of the case are that one T.P.Nambiar, father of the petitioner herein and father-in-law of respondent No.3 and grandfather of respondent Nos.4 and 5 had executed Deed of Gift on 27.08.2018 in favour of his son Nandakumar, conveying property bearing No.730, situated at 4th Main Road, 1st Block, HAL, New Tippasandra, Bangalore-75. That the said Nandakumar was diagnosed of cancer in the month of June 2020 and - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28275 WP No. 19353 of 2022 passed away on 01.01.2021. Thereafter, said T.P.Nambiar filed an application under Section 23 of the Act seeking revocation of the said Deed of Gift dated 27.08.2018 on the allegation that respondent No.3 herein, the wife of said Nandakumar, had completely neglected to take care of her ailing husband. Accepting the said plea, respondent No.2- Assistant Commissioner proceeded to pass the order dated 08.03.2021, cancelling the said Deed of Gift. Being aggrieved, respondent No.3 had preferred appeal under Section 16 of the Act before the respondent No.1, who by the impugned order while allowing the appeal has set aside the order passed by respondent No.2-Assistant Commissioner. 3. In the meanwhile, T.P.Nambiar, the donor stated to have passed away on 25.03.2021 and the present petition is filed by his daughter (sister of Nandakumar). 4. Counsel appearing for the petitioner taking this Court to the records raised two grounds, firstly that T.P.Nambiar had executed Deed of Gift in favour of his son - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28275 WP No. 19353 of 2022 Nandakumar in fond hope that he would be taken care by Nandakumar and that said Nandakumar having passed away due to cancer and COVID-19, his wife, respondent No.3 neglected to take care of him. Secondly, learned counsel refers to order dated 20.12.2024 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.254/2024 to contend that the respondent No.3 could not have maintained the appeal under Section 16 of the Act as said provision was available only to the transferor and not the transferee. Therefore, she submits that the respondent No.1 could not have entertained the appeal. On these two grounds, she seeks for allowing of the petition. 5. In response, the counsel appearing for respondent Nos.3 to 5, submits that at the outset, the petition filed under Section 23 of the Act before the Assistant Commissioner itself was not maintainable as the said provision contemplates initiating action only against the transferee and in the instant case, respondent No.3 not being the transferee, the petition could not have been entertained by the respondent No.2-Assistant - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28275 WP No. 19353 of 2022 Commissioner. He submits in any event the petitioner herein has no locus standi to maintain present writ petition as the purpose of the Act would not serve in view of death of T.P.Nambiar, the Donor of the property. 6. Heard. Perused records. 7. As rightly pointed out by learned counsel for the respondents, initiation of proceedings under Section 23 of the Act by deceased T.P.Nambiar against respondent No.3, daughter-in-law itself was not maintainable. 8. Section 23 of the Act read as under: “23. Transfer of property to be void in certain circumstances 1. Where any senior citizen who, after the commencement of this Act, has by way of gift or otherwise, his property, subject to the condition that the transferee shall provide the basic amenities and basic physical needs to the transferor and such transferee refuses or fails to provide such amenities and physical needs, the said transfer of property shall be deemed to have been made by fraud or coercion or under undue influence and shall at the option of the transferor be declared void by the Tribunal. 2. Where any senior citizen has a right to receive maintenance out of an estate and such estate or part, thereof is transferred, the right to receive - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28275 WP No. 19353 of 2022 maintenance may be enforced against the transferee if the transferee has notice of the right, or if the transfer is gratuitous; but not against the transferee for consideration and without notice of right. 3. If any senior citizen is incapable of enforcing the rights under sub-sections (1) and (2), action may be taken on his behalf by any of the organisation referred to in Explanation to sub-section (1) of section 5.” 9. Admittedly, the subject property was gifted by said T.P.Nambiar in favour of his son Nandakumar, who passed away on 01.01.2021. The petition, if any, could have been maintained only against Nandakumar. It is not the case of T.P.Nambiar that his son Nandakumar being the transferee, had refused or failed to provide amenities and physical needs. Even otherwise, perusal of Deed of Gift does not indicate any clause having been incorporated as a condition precedent for executing the said document as contemplated under Section 23 of the Act. 10. Both on facts as well as on law, the initiation of proceeding by T.P.Nambiar against his daughter-in-law, respondent No.3, who upon the demise of Nandakumar succeeded to his estate, before the Assistant - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28275 WP No. 19353 of 2022 Commissioner was of no consequences as the same was one without jurisdiction. 11. The Deputy Commissioner has set aside the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner though on an appeal filed by the respondent No.3 in a matter of this nature, the technicality of initiation of appeal under Section 16 of the Act as sought to be contended cannot be gone into as the original order itself was non est in the eye of law. 12. Further, the present petition is filed by daughter of Nambiar, who has no subsisting right over the property in the light of execution of Deed of Gift executed by T.P.Nambiar in favour of Nandakumar which is valid and subsisting. The petition, therefore, lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- (M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE HA LIST NO.: 1 SL NO.: 17