THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION O INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 18.08.2022 PASSED BY THE R1 IN MAG(4)SC/CR/09/2021-22 (ANNEXURE-J) AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

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

ORAL ORDER

This writ petition is by a daughter of donor, who had executed a Deed of Gift dated 27.08.2018 in favour of Donee, the husband of respondent No.3 being aggrieved by the order dated 18.08.2022 passed by the respondent No.1-Deputy Commissioner in exercise of his powers under Section 16 of the Maintenance and Welfare of the Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’ for short) whereby, the order dated 08.03.2021 passed by the respondent No.2-Assistant Commissioner cancelling said Deed of Gift in exercise of powers under Section 23 of the Act, has been set aside.

Brief facts of the case are that one T.P.Nambiar, father of the petitioner herein and father-in-law of respondent No.3 and grandfather of respondent Nos.4 and 5 had executed Deed of Gift on 27.08.2018 in favour of his son Nandakumar, conveying property bearing No.730, situated at 4th Main Road, 1st Block, HAL, New Tippasandra, Bangalore-75. That the said Nandakumar was diagnosed of cancer in the month of June 2020 and passed away on 01.01.2021. Thereafter, said T.P.Nambiar filed an application under Section 23 of the Act seeking revocation of the said Deed of Gift dated 27.08.2018 on the allegation that respondent No.3 herein, the wife of said Nandakumar, had completely neglected to take care of her ailing husband. Accepting the said plea, respondent No.2-Assistant Commissioner proceeded to pass the order dated 08.03.2021, cancelling the said Deed of Gift. Being aggrieved, respondent No.3 had preferred appeal under Section 16 of the Act before the respondent No.1, who by the impugned order while allowing the appeal has set aside the order passed by respondent No.2-Assistant Commissioner.

In the meanwhile, T.P.Nambiar, the donor stated to have passed away on 25.03.2021 and the present petition is filed by his daughter (sister of Nandakumar).

Counsel appearing for the petitioner taking this Court to the records raised two grounds, firstly that T.P.Nambiar had executed Deed of Gift in favour of his son Nandakumar in fond hope that he would be taken care by Nandakumar and that said Nandakumar having passed away due to cancer and COVID-19, his wife, respondent No.3 neglected to take care of him. Secondly, learned counsel refers to order dated 20.12.2024 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.254/2024 to contend that the respondent No.3 could not have maintained the appeal under Section 16 of the Act as said provision was available only to the transferor and not the transferee. Therefore, she submits that the respondent No.1 could not have entertained the appeal. On these two grounds, she seeks for allowing of the petition.

In response, the counsel appearing for respondent Nos.3 to 5, submits that at the outset, the petition filed under Section 23 of the Act before the Assistant Commissioner itself was not maintainable as the said provision contemplates initiating action only against the transferee and in the instant case, respondent No.3 not being the transferee, the petition could not have been entertained by the respondent No.2-Assistant Commissioner. He submits in any event the petitioner herein has no locus standi to maintain present writ petition as the purpose of the Act would not serve in view of death of T.P.Nambiar, the Donor of the property.

Heard. Perused records.

As rightly pointed out by learned counsel for the respondents, initiation of proceedings under Section 23 of the Act by deceased T.P.Nambiar against respondent No.3, daughter-in-law itself was not maintainable.

Section 23 of the Act read as under:

“23. Transfer of property to be void in certain circumstances