The Karnataka High Court has upheld an order directing the eviction of a government doctor and his family from his 82-year-old mother’s house in Mysuru, and ordered the Mysuru sub-divisional officer to implement the decision within 60 days of receiving the judgment.
A single-judge bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj dismissed a writ petition filed by Dr M.S. Mahesh, a medical officer in Sakleshpur taluk of Hassan district. Mahesh had challenged the Mysuru deputy commissioner’s decision upholding an earlier eviction order issued by the assistant commissioner and sub-divisional officer.
The case concerns Subhadramma, who lives in Jayalakshmipuram in Mysuru. According to the case details reported by Prajavani, she told the senior citizens’ welfare committee that she had one son and two daughters, and had been supporting herself through a pension and rental income after her husband’s death in 2008.
Subhadramma alleged that Mahesh had entered the house and caused her mental distress while forcing her sister, who had been living in an outhouse on the property, to vacate it. She sought the removal of her son and his family so that she could live peacefully in the house under her control.
The Mysuru sub-divisional officer, acting as the assistant commissioner of the senior citizens’ welfare committee, ordered on August 12, 2024, that Mahesh be evicted from the scheduled property belonging to Subhadramma. Mahesh appealed to the Mysuru deputy commissioner, who upheld the order on February 4, 2025.
The High Court dismissed Mahesh’s challenge to the deputy commissioner’s decision. The court said it did not find it necessary to re-examine the evidence considered by the tribunal and appellate authority under the senior citizens’ law in the case.
The judgment also set out the limited circumstances in which the High Court could intervene, including a lack of jurisdiction, violation of natural justice, an error of law apparent from the record or a deficiency that prevented the competent authority from reaching a decision on the matter before it.
The court directed that the deputy commissioner’s decision be implemented within 60 days after a copy of the High Court order is received. The direction applies to the eviction from the property identified in the proceedings and does not prevent the original civil dispute concerning the property between Mahesh and his mother from being decided separately.
The ruling places the immediate responsibility for implementation on the Mysuru sub-divisional officer. It also distinguishes the administrative protection available to an elderly person seeking peaceful residence from the final determination of ownership or other property rights in a civil suit.
