Next > IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE A S BOPANNA WRIT PETITION No.34606/2017(GM-RES) BETWEEN:
SRI SREEDHAR K AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS S/O LATE KEMPANNA @ KRISHNAPPA RESIDING AT FIRST FLOOR NO.8, NEW NO.U41, 3RD CROSS, KRISHNAPPA BLOCK PIPELINE, MALLESHWARAM BENGALURU – 560 003. .. PETITIONER (BY SRI.H. V.DEVARAJU, ADV.) AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA/ REVENUE DEPARTMENT AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BENGALURU – 560 001.
2. THE PRESIDENT, THE MAINTENANCE AND WELFARE OF PARENTS AND SENIOR CITIZENS TRIBUNAL AND ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BENGALURU NORTH SUB-DIVISION KHANDAYA BHAVAN KEMPEGOWDA ROAD BENGALURU – 560 009.
3. SMT GOWRAMMA AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS W/O LATE KEMPANNA RESIDING AT GROUND FLOOR NO.8, NO.U41 3RD CROSS, KRISHNAPPA BLOCK PIPELINE, MALLESHWARAM BENGALURU – 560 003.
4. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DISTRICT MAGISTRATE BENGALURU URBAND DISTRICT BEHIND KADAYA BHAVAN K G ROAD, BENGALURU – 560009. .. RESPONDENTS (BY SRI KIRAN KUMAR T.L., AGA FOR R.1,2 AND 4, SRI M SUDHAKAR PAI, ADV. FOR R.3) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUION OF INDIA PRAYING TO CALL FOR THE CONNECTED RECORDS RELATING TO ANNEXURE –A THE ORDER DATED 17.7.2017 ON THE FILE OF THE R.2.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Though the petition is listed to consider I.A.No.1/2017 for vacating stay, keeping in view that the consideration of such application would advert to the rival contentions on merits and since, the matter lies in a narrow compass at this stage, petition itself is taken up and disposed of through this order.
2. Petitioner is the son of respondent no.3.
Respondent no.3 who is a Senior Citizen had initiated the proceedings under Section 23 of The Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act 2007 before respondent no.2. Respondent no.2 through the order impugned dated 17.07.2017 has allowed the application and ordered that the gift deed executed in favour of the petitioner be set-aside. Petitioner claiming to be aggrieved by this order is before this Court in this petition.
3. Though the respondent through the application filed for vacating stay has sought to justify the order passed by respondent no.2, what is necessary to be taken note at this juncture is with regard to the manner of consideration as made by respondent no.2, since it is the contention on behalf of the petitioner that the order impugned which affects the right of the petitioner has been passed without affording opportunity and is essentially, even has denoted in the order impugned passed, is an exparte order.
4. In that regard, learned counsel for the petitioner with reference to Annexure “E”, a copy of the order sheet maintained in the proceedings by respondent no.2, would point out that though the petitioner was present on 12.04.2017, the case was adjourned to 29.04.2017 and it was reserved for orders without providing an opportunity.
5. Learned counsel in that regard would indicate that immediately thereafter, the petitioner has also filed the objection statement on 29.05.2017 as at Annexure “F”. It is contended that despite the same, respondent no.2 on observing that the petitioner has not appeared before the Court inspite of service of notice, has placed him exparte and proceeded to pass the order. In that view of the matter, this Court at this juncture is not required to advert to the merits of the rival contentions since the matter is to be reconsidered by respondent no.2 after taking note of the objections filed by the petitioner to the claim application and thereafter, come to a conclusion in accordance with law after providing sufficient opportunity to the petitioner as also respondent no.3. In that view, the order impugned is liable to be set- aside. However, keeping in view the claim being made by respondent no.3 under the Act which provides the benefit of being maintained also, the petitioner shall comply with the direction that had been issued by this Court on 22.08.2017 and continue to deposit the sum of Rs.12,500/- to the account of respondent no.3 as was being done earlier. In any event, the order impugned dated 17.07.2017 is set- aside. The matter stands remitted to respondent no.2 to restore the case in MSC/CR/66/2016-17 on file and proceed in accordance with law after providing opportunity to the parties.
6. Since the parties concerned are represented by their counsel, they shall appear before respondent no.2 on 31.10.2017 at 3.00 PM as the first date for appearance. Respondent no.2 shall thereafter proceed in accordance with law.
Petition is accordingly disposed of. I.A.1/2017 is also disposed of.
Next >