Allowed

Mrs Anitha N v. Mrs N Sunanda Bai

Karnataka HC6 Aug 2024WP/8682/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka disposed of a writ petition challenging an order directing petitioners to hand over house possession. Noting complete compliance and the deceased father leaving estate, the court confirmed the vacating order but granted liberty to the daughter to seek her legal share in the father's property separately.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of confirming Assistant Commissioner's order; liberty granted to petitioner to seek her share in father's property later.

Mrs Anitha N Vs Mrs N Sunanda Bai — Property and Title | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:31148 WP No. 8682 of 2019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL WRIT PETITION NO. 8682 OF 2019 (GM-RES)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

MRS ANITHA N., D/O MR.NARASINGA RAO, W/O MR.MUKUNDA RAO, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS

¶8

MR.MUKUNDA RAO S/O HANUMANTHA RAO KALA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS

¶9

PETITIONER NOS.1 AND 2 R/AT ASWATHANAGAR R.M.V. 2^ND STAGE, 4^TH MAIN ROAD, 4^TH CROSS, COCONUT GARDEN, SANJAYNAGAR POST, BANGALORE-560 094.

¶10

…PETITIONERS

¶11

(BY SRI. T M VIJAYAKUMAR .,ADVOCATE)

¶12

Digitally signed by SUMA B N Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

AND:

¶14

MRS. N SUNANDA BAI W/O MR.NARASINGA RAO, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/AT NO.12/25, 1^ST FLOOR, 3^RD CROSS, ASWATHNAGAR, SANJAYNAGAR POST, BANGALORE-560 094.

¶15

MR.NARASINGA RAO AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, R/AT NO.12/25, 1^ST FLOOR 3^RD CROSS, ASWATHANAGAR, SANJAYNAGAR POST,

¶16

¶17

NC: 2024:KHC:31148 WP No. 8682 of 2019

¶18

BANGALORE-560 094.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI. N JAIPRAKASH., ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2)

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 03.12.2018 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL OF MAINTENANCE AND WELFARE OF PARENTS AND SENIOR CITIZENS AND ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, BENGALURU NORTH SUBDIVISION, AT BENGALURU VIDE ANNEXURE-C.

¶22

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

Petitioners being the daughter and son-in-law respectively of respondent Nos.1 and 2 are before this Court aggrieved by the order dated 03.12.2018 passed by the Assistant Commissioner in Case No. MSC/CR/42/201718 as per Annexure-C in and by which, the petitioners have been directed to vacate and hand over the physical possession of the schedule property bearing Corporation No.1, Old PID No.99-143-1, New PID No.035-WO114-9 (formerly bearing site No.1) situated at 1^st Cross, Coconut

¶26

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:31148 WP No. 8682 of 2019

¶27

Garden, Ashwathnagar, Bangalore Ward No.99 to the respondents.

¶28

Counsel for the petitioners submits that pursuant to the impugned order passed by the Assistant Commissioner, petitioners have vacated the premises and are residing separately at Nelamangala Town, as such there is complete compliance of the said order.

¶29

He further submits that the subject property belonged to respondent No.2 who passed away leaving behind his wife- respondent No.1, daughter-petitioner No.1 and children of his pre-deceased daughter.

¶30

He further submits that after demise of

¶31

respondent No.2, respondent No.1 is also residing with the petitioners. However, since the property belonged to the respondent No.2, petitioner No.1 along with respondent No.1 as well as children of pre-deceased daughter are entitled for share in the said property. Therefore, he

¶32

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:31148 WP No. 8682 of 2019

¶33

submits that reserving liberty to the petitioners to avail

¶34

such remedy petition be disposed of.

¶35

Submission is taken on record.

¶36

In view of the above facts and circumstances,

¶37

petition is disposed of, confirming the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner in Case No. MSC/CR/42/2017-18.

¶38

However, if the petitioner No.1 is desirous, she is at liberty to seek her entitlement in the property left behind by her father deceased respondent No.2 in the manner known to law. The order dated 03.12.2018 passed by the Assistant Commissioner and now confirmed by this Court shall not come in the way of petitioner seeking her share in the property in accordance with law.

¶39

With the above observation, petition is disposed of.

¶40

Sd/(M.G.S. KAMAL) JUDGE

¶41

RU List No.: 1 Sl No.: 28

Mrs Anitha N v. Mrs N Sunanda Bai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs Anitha N v. Mrs N Sunanda Bai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri. v. Gopalappa Vs the State of Karnataka

R. Krishna Murthy Vs M Manohar

Smt Padma Vs the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board

Sri. Prakash Vs Sri. Muniyappa

Athrijalu Sree Mahalingeshwara Temple Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Prasanna C Vs the Deputy Registrar of Co. Op Societies