- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29315 WP No. 8195 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 8195 OF 2026 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: SMT PADMA @ PADMAVATHI B W/O. MANJUNATH O.T., AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, R/AT NO.176/3, 1ST MAIN, JAKKASANDRA, JANATHA COLONY, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU 560 034. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. TEJAS N.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT RAMAKKA W/O. LATE. SHAMANNA, AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, R/AT NO.223, BANNERGHATTA CIRCLE, MARAGONDANAHALLI, HULLIMAVU POST, BENGALURU 560 105. 2. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, SENIOR CITIZENS MAINTENANCE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU SOUTH SUB-DIVISION, BENGALURU 560 001. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. JANARDHANA .G., ADVOCATE FOR R1) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR SUCH OTHER WRIT, OR DIRECTION TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD. 08.01.2026 PASSED BY THE Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVENDRA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29315 WP No. 8195 of 2026 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, SENIOR CITIZEN MAINTENANCE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU SOUTH SUB-DIVISION, BENGALURU IN MSC.CR.NO.27/2024 (AS PER ANNX-A) IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ ORAL ORDER 1. The Petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs: a) Issue Writ of certiorari or such other writ, or direction to set-aside the impugned order dated: 08.01.2026 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Senior Citizen Maintenance Tribunal, Bengaluru South Sub-division, Bengaluru in MSC.CR.No.27/2024 (As per Annexure-A) in the interest of justice and equity. b) Issue any other writ, order or direction which deems fit for this Hon’ble Court under the facts and circumstances of the case including the award of costs in the interest of justice and equity. 2. Respondent no.1-mother had filed a petition, which was registered as Petition No.27/2024 before the Respondent No.2 - Assistant Commissioner, Senior Citizens Maintenance Tribunal alleging that the respondent’s daughter-Petitioner herein and her husband after their marriage had sought permission of Respondent No.1-mother to live in her house promising to take care of her. It is believing the same that the mother permitted the daughter and - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29315 WP No. 8195 of 2026 the son-in-law to live in the said house. The said daughter and son-in-law instead of taking care of the mother, forcibly threw out the mother from the property on 08.09.2023 and started forcibly collecting rents from the tenants in the building owned by the mother. The said application having been taken up for consideration by the Assistant Commissioner, the same came to be allowed in the following terms. ORDER The petition is hereby allowed a) It is ordered and directed to the respondent to deliver the physical possession of the petition schedule property to the petitioner with in thirty days from the date of this order. b) The respondent is further directed to handed over the original documents relating to the petition schedule properties and not to harass and not to give any trouble to the petitioner and further directed to the respondent to pay the rents collected from the tenants from June 2023 till date to the petitioner. c) In the event the respondent fails to handed over the physical possession of the above said property to the petitioner as stated supra and fails to comply with the order of the tribunal to issue warrant against the respondent for the implementation of this order in its letter and spirit with the help of jurisdictional police and jurisdictional Tahasildar. Note: Office is directed to notify the parties within 7 days from the date of pronouncement of this order. Dictated to the stenographer, the typescript edited by me, corrected and then pronounced in open court on this 8th day of January 2026. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29315 WP No. 8195 of 2026 3. It is challenging the said order that the petitioner - daughter is before this Court. 4. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that by way of the aforesaid order, the Tribunal has decided the title of the property which it did not have the authority to do so. His submission is that the daughter has filed a suit against the mother claiming title on the basis of adverse possession and on the basis of alleged oral gift of the grandfather which is pending consideration and until that suit was decided, no action could have been taken by the Assistant Commissioner. He relies upon the decision of a Co-ordinate Branch of this Court in the case of Sri.Dhariyappagouda Patil vs. the State of Karnataka and others1 to contend that the Assistant Commissioner does not have any power to decide the title of a property which would be beyond his jurisdiction. 5. Heard Sri.Tejas N., learned counsel for the Petitioner and Sri.Janardhana G., learned counsel for Respondent No.1 and perused papers. 6. Insofar as the decision in Sri.Dhariyappagouda Patil’s1 case is concerned, that was a case where an 1 WP No.101705/2024 dtd 2.7.2024 - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29315 WP No. 8195 of 2026 application had been filed under Section 23 of the Act to nullify a sale deed and it is in those circumstances that the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court held that the Assistant Commissioner did not have the power to set aside a sale deed. That decision would not be applicable into the present matter since there is no sale deed which has been executed in favour of the petitioner and there is no title that the petitioner can claim except on the basis of adverse possession in a suit which is pending. The very concept of adverse possession would mean and include that there is an acknowledgment of title of the defendant in the suit i.e., the mother. Once the title of the mother is accepted by the daughter in a suit filed for adverse possession, the question of determination of any title in the present matter would not arise. It is only adversarial interest that is required to be established by the daughter in those proceedings. In the present matter, as per the facts which have been stated, the property is belonging to the mother, having received the same under a sale deed and a gift deed, there is no particular document executed in favour of the daughter establishing any title in her favour so as to allege that there is a title dispute which has been decided by the Assistant Commissioner. The - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:29315 WP No. 8195 of 2026 property belonging to the mother, the daughter and son-in-law have no independent right, title or interest in the same. They having resorted to throwing the mother out of the house forcibly, the mother has rightly approached the Senior Citizens' Maintenance Tribunal, for necessary orders to protect her interests, which the Tribunal has rightly protected by passing the aforesaid order. I do not find any infirmity in the said order. The respondent No.2 is directed to implement the said order within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. SD/- (SURAJ GOVINDARAJ) JUDGE PRS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 36