1. The present writ petition is filed by the daughter of the fourth respondent seeking for a writ of certiorari to quash the order dated 15.03.2017 made in M.A.G. No. 121/2016-17 passed by the third respondent-Assistant Commissioner vide Annexure-C and the Order dated 08.11.2017 made in Revision Misc. (HNK) 12/2017 passed by the second respondent/Deputy Commissioner, vide Annexure-F.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that she is a widow, she lost her husband about 33 years ago, the fourth respondent is her mother and the fifth respondent is her elder brother. After the demise of her husband, petitioner has been living with her unmarried daughter and the fourth respondent. The petitioner has been taking care of her mother-fourth respondent without causing any inconvenience to her and has been paying Rs. 3,000/- every month to the fourth respondent to look after herself and is taking care of her day to day affairs.

3. It is the further case of the petitioner that, on 08.07.2015, her mother-fourth respondent, without any conditions, executed an absolute gift deed in favour of the petitioner with respect to the house property bearing No. 29, L-335, 30, L-335/1, Sub No. 29, L-335/A and 30, L-335/1 measuring East to West 55 feet, North to South 12 feet out of which ground floor measures East to West 19½ feet, North to South 12 feet; first floor measures East to West 19½ feet, North to South 12 feet; and second floor measures East to West 19½ feet, North to South 12 feet, situated at Ashoka Road, Lashker Mohall, Mysuru City. The said gift deed was registered in the office of the Sub Registrar, Mysuru East, as per Annexure-A.

4. When the things stood thus, without knowing what is going on, the fourth respondent signed a complaint prepared by the fifth respondent and submitted it to the third respondent. In the complaint, the fourth respondent was forced to allege that the petitioner has neglected the fourth respondent and hence, prayed to cancel the gift deed. It is further contended that the third respondent took up the matter under Section 23(1) of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (‘Act’ for short), but failed to comply with Section 8 of the ‘Act’. As per Section 8 of the Act, the third respondent has got all such powers of the Civil Court for the purpose of taking evidence on oath and of enforcing attendance of witnesses, as such, the third respondent was supposed to follow ‘summary procedure’. Without following the procedure contemplated under Sections 6(6) and 8 of the ‘Act’ the third respondent has proceeded to pass the impugned order declaring the gift deed dated 08.07.2015 as null and void. Aggrieved by the said order of the third respondent-Assistant Commissioner, the petitioner filed an appeal before the second respondent-Deputy Commissioner invoking the provisions of Section 16 of the ‘Act’. The said appeal was dismissed as not maintainable. Hence the present writ petition is filed.

5. The learned counsel for the fourth respondent submits that the respondent No. 4 has filed objections to I.A. No. 1/2018 and in the said objections, she has taken contentions negating the pleadings made in the writ petition and it is specifically contended that the fourth respondent is the sole and absolute owner in possession and enjoyment of the property stated supra and since the petitioner was illegally interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the property, the fourth respondent filed a suit for temporary injunction in O.S. No. 1249/2017 and the Trial Court granted injunction on 15.12.2017. It is further contended that the petitioner was taking care of the fourth respondent and in anticipation that the petitioner would take care of her in future, the fourth respondent executed a gift deed dated 08.07.2015 in favor of the petitioner. After execution of the gift deed, the petitioner started to neglect the fourth respondent and did not take care of the basic necessities. Having no other option,