K. GOPALAIAH v. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
Case at a glance
- Bench
- SRI NAVEEN
- Neutral citation
- 2024:KHC:33529
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 26.10.2023 passed by respondent No. 2, insofar as it relates to the finding that the Gift Deed dated 29.11.2021 executed in favor of respondent No. 3 is valid, is hereby quashed. The other portions of…
Judgment
(BY SRI NAVEEN J N, ADVOCATE) AND:
THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER CHIKKABALLAPURA, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-561206. K MAHENDRAKUMAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, CHIKKABALLAPURA SUB-DIVISION, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-561206.
SMT.SUNKU PRANEETI SAI, W/O K.G.VENKATESH, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, RESIDING AT WARD NO.21, BEHIND MUNICIPAL OFFICE, KARNATAKA GRAMEENA BANK ROAD, BAGEPALLI, CHIKKABALLAPURA DISTRICT-561207. (BY SMT NAVYA SHEKAR LEARNED AGA) …RESPONDENTS - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:33529 WP No. 22155 of 2024 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE ORDER IN NO. MSCR(BAGE) 43/2021-22 DTD 26.10.2023 PASSED BY THE R-2 IN SO FAR AS RELATES TO THE FINDING THAT THE GIFT DEED DTD 29.11.2021 OBTAINED BY THE R-3 IS VALID MARKED AT ANNX-G TO THE WRIT PETITION AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR ORAL ORDER Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
2. The petitioner challenges the order dated
26.10.2023 at Annexure-'G' passed by respondent No. 2, which held that the Gift Deed dated 29.11.2021 executed in favor of respondent No. 3 is valid.
3. Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') provides that a transfer of property can be declared void in certain circumstances. Specifically, the transfer can be deemed null and void if the beneficiary under the Gift Deed fails to provide basic amenities and physical needs, despite any clauses contained in the Gift Deed. - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:33529 WP No. 22155 of 2024
However, respondent No. 2 has not confined the decision to whether the petitioner is entitled to a declaration that the Gift Deed is null and void under Section 23 of the Act. Instead, respondent No. 2 has erroneously recorded a finding that the Gift Deed executed in favor of respondent No. 3 is valid. Such a determination can only be made by a jurisdictional Civil Court. Consequently, this finding in the impugned order requires modification.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 26.10.2023 passed by respondent No. 2, insofar as it relates to the finding that the Gift Deed dated 29.11.2021 executed in favor of respondent No. 3 is valid, is hereby quashed. The other portions of the impugned order remain unaltered. Sd/- (HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR) JUDGE VGR
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.