Mr.S.Susheela, learned senior counsel for Mr.Somanath H., learned counsel for the petitioners.

Mr.Y.D.Harsha, learned Additional Government Advocate counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 5.

Mr.Padmanabha V. Mahale Learned Senior Counsel for Mr.S.Venugopala, learned counsel for respondent No.7.

2. The writ petitions are admitted for hearing. With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the same are heard finally.

3. In these petitions under Articles 226 & 227 of Constitution of India, the petitioners inter alia seek a writ of certiorari for quashment of orders dated 20.08.2016 & 20.12.2016 passed by the Assistant Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner under the provisions of Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short). The petitioner also seeks a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to restore the entries in the revenue records in the name of the petitioner in respect of Sy.Nos.93/1, 96/2, 96/3, 98/2, 100/1 khatha No.55, 42, 43, 126, 128, 130, 131 & 132/1 situated in Kesthur Village and Mavukere Village Kora Hobli, Tumkur Taluk, Tumkur District by nullifying the partition dated 24.01.1998 and 28.04.2008. In order to appreciate the petitioners challenge to the impugned order few facts need mention, which are stated infra:

The petitioners are husband and wife. The respondent Nos.6 & 7 are the children of the petitioners. Admittedly, the petitioners are senior citizens. It is averred in the writ petition that on 24.01.1998, the respondent No.6 fraudulently and by misrepresentation got executed a partition deed, by which the properties viz., land bearing Sy.No.93/1, 96/2, 96/3, 98/2, 100/11A02, Khatha No.55 with house and agricultural properties measuring 15 acres 2 guntas and 1 site with a house as well as lands measuring 15 acres and 7 guntas were allotted amongst petitioner No.1 and respondent Nos.6 & 7. Admittedly, petitioner No.2 was not a party to the partition deed. Thereafter, on 28.04.2008, another partition deed was executed between the petitioners and respondent No.7. Under the aforesaid partition, which was reduced into writing on 28.04.2008, the petitioners were allotted land bearing Sy.No.93/1 and Khata No.55 along with a site and a house. Whereas, respondent No.7 was allotted lands bearing Sy.No.93/1, 96/2, 96/3, 98/2 and 100/1 measuring 12 acres and 13 guntas as well as one house. A sum of Rs.2 Lakhs each was allotted to two daughters of the petitioners under the aforesaid deed. Admittedly, the daughters of the petitioners have filed a suit for partition viz., O.S.No.272/2014, which is pending before the Trial Court in which the petitioners and respondent Nos.6 & 7 have been impleaded as parties.

4. The petitioners filed an application under Section 23 of the Act seeking a relief of nullification of the partition deeds dated 24.01.1998 and 28.04.2008 to the extent by which some of the properties were allotted in favour of respondent Nos.6 and 7. the respondent No.6 did not file any objection to the application filed by the petitioners. The claim of the petitioners was contested by respondent No.7. The Assistant Commissioner by an order dated 20.08.2016 partly allowed the application filed by the petitioners. The Assistant Commissioner directed the respondent Nos.6 & 7 as well as daughters of the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.2,500/p.m. to the petitioners. Being aggrieved the petitioners filed an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner. The Deputy Commissioner by order dated 20.12.2016 directed respondent Nos.6 & 7 to ensure that names of their parents are recorded jointly in the records in respect of 1 acre land each and a house until their death. In the aforesaid factual background, the petitioners have approached this Court.

5. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submitted that expression ‘has transferred by way of gift or otherwise’ used in Section 23 (1) of the Act has to be read in the light of object of the Act as well as bearing