Point of Law: As per Section 96 (3) CPC no appeal shall lie from a decree by the Court with the consent of the parties -Once the parties having accepted the officer as a judge, the petitioner cannot now plead that the respondent No.3 has no jurisdiction because principles of estoppel would come into operation and no jurisdictional issues would arise. The petitioner and his brothers having agreed to re-gift two acres of land each to their father and by entering into a MPU, are estopped under Section 115 of the Evidence Act to take a plea in this Writ Petition that they are not bound by that consent award because they cannot contradict, deny or declare to be false the previous statement made by them before the RDO.

ORDER:

1. This Writ Petition is filed seeking to issue a writ of certiorari calling for records in Case No.J/3375/2016, dated 06.4.2018 and 18.7.2019 passed by the third respondent - Revenue Divisional Officer-cum-Tribunal constituted under Maintenance & Welfare of the Parents & Senior Citizens Act, 2007, Hyderabad whereunder the gift deed bearing Doc.No.3294/1998 dated 26.11.1998 executed by the fourth respondent herein in favour of the petitioner and respondent Nos.5 and 6 was cancelled, and to quash the same as being illegal and arbitrary.

2. The case of the petitioner in nutshell is that he and respondent Nos.5 and 6 are the sons of respondent No.4 herein. Respondent No.4 purchased agricultural dry land wet lands total admeasuring Ac.20-39 guntas in Sy.Nos.215, 228 and 229 of Thakkadpally village, Yacharam Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, in the year 1994 (hereinafter referred to as schedule ‘A’ property). In the year 1998, the respondent No.4 transferred that property to the petitioner and respondent Nos.5 and 6 equally by way of a registered gift deed dated 26.11.1998 vide Document No.3294/1998. The petitioner further assets that their joint family consists of house bearing D.No.3-6-25, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad, admeasuring 80 sq. yards and house bearing D.No.3-6-26, which is also situated at Basheerbagh, Hyderabad, admeasuring 48 sq. yards (hereinafter referred to as schedule ‘B’ property). Further, the grandmother of the petitioner purchased property bearing H.No.3-4-835/A, Barkathpura Chaman, Hyderabad, admeasuring 90 sq. yards during her lifetime (hereinafter referred to as schedule ‘C’ property). The petitioner further asserts that as the respondent No.4 i.e. their father was having some financial constraints, he cleared off those debts incurred by the respondent No.4 to the tune of Rs.18,45,000/- with interest.

3. It is the further case of the petitioner that his mother passed away in the year 2015 and after her demise, the petitioner and the respondent Nos.4 to 6 came to a mutual understanding to partition Schedule B property and in furtherance of the same, a registered partition deed dated 31.10.2015 was executed vide Document No.3536/2015. As per the said partition schedule B property was divided amongst the petitioner and his two brothers. In lieu thereof, the respondent No.4 was paid cash of Rs.5.00 lakhs towards his share. Further, the schedule C property was devolved unto the respondent No.6 by way of a release deed by which the respondent No.4 relinquished his share in the said property. While the things stood thus, in the year 2015, after the death of his first wife, the respondent No.4 married second time and has been residing in the property belonging to the respondent No.6 along with his second wife.

4. The petitioner further asserts that despite receiving his share of money in the partition, in the year 2016, respondent No.4 filed an application before the respondent No.3 - RDO seeking nullification of the gift deed bearing Doc.No.3294/1998 dated 26.11.1998 under Section 23 (1) of the Maintenance & Welfare of the Parents & Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (for short ‘the Act’), whereupon the respondent No.3 passed an order dated 06.4.2018 in Case No.J/3375/2016, partly cancelling the gift deed bearing Doc.No.3294/1998 dated 26.11.1998 and directing the petitioner and respondent Nos.5 and 6 to re-gift the property to an extent of Ac.1-00 in the plain area i.e. Sy.Nos.228 and 229 and Ac.5.00 in the hill rock area i.e. in Sy.No.215 totalling to an extent of Ac.6-00 guntas to the respondent No.4. Thereafter, as the said order was not implemented, on the respondent No.4 approaching the respondent No.3, the respondent No.3 passed an order dated 18.7.2019 in Case No.J/3375/2016 directing the cancellation of the gift deed bearing Doc.No.3294/1998 dated 26.11.1998 and directed the petitioner and respondent Nos.5 and 6 to re-gift the property as directed earlier dated 06.4.2018. The petitioner further states that he and his bro