Allowed

Smt Sheela Ramesh v. Smt Manjula Murthy

Karnataka HC18 Nov 2022WP/73/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka disposed of a writ petition seeking to quash an order quashing a registered gift deed. Upon a compromise between the petitioner and the mother (Respondent 1) to share sale proceeds of the property, the Court quashed the impugned order and terminated the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 03.11.2018 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Mysuru is quashed and the writ petition is disposed.

Smt Sheela Ramesh Vs Smt Manjula Murthy — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

WP No. 73 of 2019

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 73 OF 2019 (GM-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SMT. SHEELA RAMESH W/O RAMESH AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/AT "ANAGHA" NO.4 BLOCK-30, NEAR ADITHYA CIRCLE SOMANATHA NAGAR MYSURU – 570 022.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. PRATHEEP K.C., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

SMT. MANJULA MURTHY S/O LATE P. RAMAMURTHY AGED ABOUT 76 YEARS R/AT "ANAGHA" NO.4 BLOCK-30, NEAR ADITHYA CIRCLE

¶13

Digitally signed by PADMAVATHI B K Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

SOMANATHA NAGAR MYSURU – 570 022 PRESENTLY R/AT NO.128, GANGA NILAYA 1^ST CROSS, 1^ST MAIN UNIVERSITY LAYOUT BEML 5^TH STAGE RAJARAJESHWARINAGAR

¶15

¶16

WP No. 73 of 2019

¶17

BENGALURU – 560 098.

¶18

THE PRESIDENT SUB-DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE MYSORE SUB-DIVISION

¶19

MYSURU – 14. REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER.

¶20

…RESPONDENTS

¶21

(BY SRI SHIVAYOGESH SHIVAYOGIMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2 - SERVED)

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTED 3.11.2018 PASSED BY THE R-2 VIDE ANNEX-F.

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

ORDER

¶25

The petitioner is before this Court calling in question an order dated 03.11.2018 bearing No.MYSAC MAG/SRCZ/02/2018 (36283), passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Mysuru.

¶26

During the pendency of the writ petition, the

¶27

parties to the lis have entered into compromise and a

¶28

¶29

WP No. 73 of 2019

¶30

memorandum of compromise petition filed under Order 23

¶31

Rule 3 of CPC is also filed before this Court to that effect.

¶32

The memorandum of compromise petition reads as

¶33

follows:

¶34

“The petitioner and respondent No.1 beg to submit as follows:

¶35

1. It is submitted that, the respondent No.1 executed a registered gift deed dated 01.07.15 which is registered as document No.MYW-1-02733-2015, CD No.MYWD49 in the office of senior sub-registrar, Mysore west in respect of house property site No.4, situated at Somanathanagara block No.30, Kergalli village, Jayapura Hobli, Mysore taluk measuring east to west 15 meter and North to south 9 meter. Herein after it is referred as schedule property.

¶36

2. It is submitted that, the respondent No.1 filed a petition U/S 4 & 23 of Maintenance and welfare of parents and senior citizens act 2007 in case No.MYSAC-MAG/SRCZ/02/2018

¶37

(36283) the respondent No.2 by its impugned order 03.11.2018 & corrected order dated 19.12.2018 set aside the registered gift deed dated 01.07.2015 and ordered that the

¶38

¶39

WP No. 73 of 2019

¶40

Katha of the house property mentioned above to be registered in the name of Respondent.

¶41

3. It is submitted that, during the pendency of writ petition the parties to this writ petition & son of respondent No.1, brother of petitioner by name Sri Pranesh, aged about 56 years have come to an amicable settlement and as per the settlement the parties are decided to dispose of the subject house property mentioned herein above and proceeds of the sale to be shared equally among them to which the petitioner and respondent No.1 is agreed to.

¶42

4. It is submitted that, the parties have also entered into unregistered memorandum of understanding dated 14.09.2022 and same has been notarized at Mysore.

¶43

Wherefore it is prayed this Hon’ble Court be pleased to dispose of above writ petition in the above terms in the interest of justice and equity.”

¶44

In the light of the compromise entered into between

¶45

the parties as quoted (supra) , I deem it appropriate to terminate the proceedings by quashing the impugned

¶46

¶47

WP No. 73 of 2019

¶48

order dated 03.11.2018, passed by the Assistant

¶49

Commissioner, Mysuru District.

¶50

For the aforesaid reasons, the following:

¶51

ORDER

¶52

(i) The writ petition is disposed.

¶53

(ii) The order dated 03.11.2018 bearing No.MYSAC MAG/SRCZ/02/2018 (36283), passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Mysuru, stands quashed.

¶54

Sd/JUDGE

¶55

NVJ List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1

Smt Sheela Ramesh v. Smt Manjula Murthy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Sheela Ramesh v. Smt Manjula Murthy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr H K Srinath Vs Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.

Sri. Nanda Kumar. K Vs Deputy Registrar of Chits

Sri a Tangaraj Vs Sri Gopal

The Registrar Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt Bharath Raj Vs M/S National Textile Corporation

Fathima Vs State of Karnataka