IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.27478 OF 2018 (GM - RES) BETWEEN:
Sri.Savandayya, S/o late Veeraiah, Aged about 79 years, R/at Halasabele Village, Hagalkote Post, Kasaba Hobli, Magadi Taluk, Ramanagar District.
… Petitioner (By Sri.T.P.Satishchandra Kumar, Advocate) AND:
1. The Chairman, Tribunal of Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens and Assistant Commissioner, Bengaluru North Sub-Division, Kandaya Bhavan, Kempegowda Road, Bengaluru – 560 009.
2. Smt. Asha, W/o Late H.S.Shivakumar, Aged about 36 years, R/at Halasabele Village, Hagalkote Post, Kasaba Hobli, Magadi Taluk, Ramanagar District.
…Respondents (By Smt. Prathima Honnapura, AGA for R1) This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying to quash the order dated 22.03.2018 in Case No.MSC/CR/62/2017-18 passed by the R-1 vide Annexure – D and etc., This Writ Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER Sri.T.P.Satishchandra Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Smt.Prathima Honnapura, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1.
2. Taking into account the order which this Court proposes to pass, it is not necessary to issue notice to the respondent No.2.
3. In this petition, the petitioner inter alia has assailed the validity of the order dated 22.03.2018 passed by respondent No.1.
4. When the matter was taken up today, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.1 submitted that against the impugned order, an appeal lies before the Deputy Commissioner under Section 16 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’ for short) and the petitioner can avail the aforesaid remedy.
5. In view of the aforesaid submission and in the facts of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to take recourse to the remedy provided to him under Section 16 of the Act.
6. Needless to state that in case, the petitioner files an appeal within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order passed today, the appellate authority shall afford him the benefit of principles contained under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 and shall decide the appeal preferred by him bearing in mind the time limit prescribed under Section 16(6) of the Act.
7. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/- JUDGE dn/-