IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.36144 OF 2017 (GM-RES) BETWEEN:
ANANDA GOWDA S/O BABU GOWDA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT. BARAMELU HOUSE MOGARU VILLAGE & POST BELTHANGADY TALUK D.K. 574211. … PETITIONER (By Mr. AJAY PRABHU M, ADV.) AND:
1. SMT. NAGAMMA W/O LATE NONNAIAH GOWDA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS R/AT. ANIL HOUSE BANDUR VILLAGE BELTHANGADY TALUK D.K.-574211.
2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER PUTTUR SUB-DIVISION, PUTUR D.K. DISTRICT-574201.
… RESPONDENTS (By Mr. SHARATH KUMAR H.N. ADV., FOR R1 Mr. Y.D. HARSHA, LEARNED AGA FOR R2) - - -
This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the impugned order dated 2.5.2017 passed in No.M.S.C.CR.72/2016-17 by the R-2 as per Annexure-A and consequently, quash entire proceedings in No.M.S.C.CR.72/2016-17 on the file of R-2 pursuant to the petitioner filed by R-1 and etc.
This Writ Petition coming on for preliminary hearing in ‘B’ group this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Mr.Ajay Prabhu M., learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr.Sharath Kumar H.N., learned counsel for respondent No.1.
2. In this petition under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 02.05.2017 passed by the Assistant Commissioner Under Section 23 Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short).
3. learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a bonafide purchaser of the property from respondent No.1 by a registered sale deed dated 27.06.2015 and is no in any way related to respondent No.1 and therefore, the provisions of the Act are not applicable. However, he submits that he be granted liberty to raise objection in this regard before the Assistant Commissioner and the Assistant Commissioner be directed to consider the objections filed by the petitioner by a speaking order before proceeding further with the matter. On the other hand,, learned counsel for the respondents have supported the order.
4. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. By the impugned order, the Assistant Commissioner has unilaterally recorded a finding that the respondent is occupying the land which is a part of the sale deed. Therefore, the Tahasildar is directed to enquire and submit the report. The petitioner has a right to raise contention before the Assistant Commissioner and that he has no jurisdiction under the Act to proceed for the petitioner. Therefore, the petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to raise an objection with regard to maintainability of the proceedings under Section 23 of the Act for the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order passed today. Needless to state that in case the petitioner files such an application, the Assistant Commissioner shall decide the objection preferred by the petitioner by a speaking order after affording an opportunity of hearing to all the necessary parties before proceeding further with the matter.
Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE SS