Dismissed

P.v.Prakash v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC4 Dec 2020WP(C)/27015/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala dismissed a Writ Petition challenging the Tahasildar's refusal to issue a Legal Heirship Certificate because the deceased's father had multiple marriages creating complex disputes among several families. The Court held the Tahasildar's order was not illegal, noting there is no statutory appellate authority and the remedy lies in Civil Court under the Kerala Village Manual,

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to approach the Civil Court for appropriate remedy.

P.v.Prakash Vs State of Kerala — Succession and Inheritance | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 13TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942 WP(C).No.27015 OF 2020

¶5

PETITIONER/S:

¶6

1 P.V.PRAKASH AGED 65 YEARS S/O. T.P.VELAYUDHAN, VELAYUDHA COTTAGE, EROOR VILLAGE, PUNALUR TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 312

¶7

2 V.JAYASIMHAN AGED 62 YEARS S/O. T.P.VELAYUDHAN, KARTHIKA, PALAYAMKUNNU,P.O., CHEMMANTHY VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRCT-695 146

¶8

3 V.ANILKUMAR AGED 58 YEARS S/O. T.P.VELAYUDHAN, SASWATHAM, PALAYAMKUNNU P.O., AYROOR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRCT-695 146

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.R.RAJESH (VARKALA) SRI.S.SUNIL KUMAR (KADAKKAVUR) SRI.M.KIRANLAL SRI.MANU RAMACHANDRAN SRI.T.S.SARATH SHRI.SAMEER M NAIR

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRCT-695 001

¶12

2 REVENUE SECRETARY, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695 001

¶13

WP(C).No.27015 OF 2020

¶14

¶15

3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695035

¶16

4 THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695 141

¶17

5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, CHEMMARUTHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695146

¶18

6 SUNIL, S/O. BALAKRISHNAN, HIMALAYAM, PALAYAMKUNNU P.O., AYROOR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695 146

¶19

SMT.PRINCY XAVIER ,GP

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.12.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

WP(C).No.27015 OF 2020

¶22

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

Dated this the 4th day of December 2020

¶25

The petitioners are challenging Exhibit. P14 order
issued by the Tahasildar, in which the Tahasildar has stated
that father of the deceased B. Radhakrishnan has married
more than once and there are several issues out of that. It
is also stated, in view of the fact that the legal heirs are to
be found out from several families, it is difficult for the
Tahasildar to issue a Legal Heir-ship Certificate. Allowing
the petitioners to approach Civil Court, the application for
Legal Heir-ship Certificate was rejected.

¶26

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits
that, the Tahasildar himself should have enquired the
matter and issued the certificate. Petitioners have produced
Exhibit. P15 letter of the Government, regarding non-
availability of an appellate authority, as against the orders
issued by the Tahasildar, in respect of an application for
Legal Heir-ship Certificate or in respect of disputes arising
from the issuance of Legal Heir-ship Certificate.

¶27

¶28

WP(C).No.27015 OF 2020

¶29

3. It is also relevant to note that, the petitioners

¶30

themselves have stated in Para. 14 of the Writ Petition that,
as per Kerala Village Manual, if any dispute arise regarding
issuance of Legal Heir-ship Certificate, the only remedy is
to file a suit in Civil Court. It is also seen that there is no
Appellate Authority prescribed by the Government or in any
legislation, as against the orders passed by the Tahsildar.
It appears that there are serious disputes with respect to
the Legal Heir-ship. In view of the fact that there are
several issues for the father of the deceased B.
Radhakrishnan, the Tahsildar has pointed out complexity
involved in arriving at a decision as to the legal heirs to be
included. In the above circumstances, the order passed by
the Tahsildar cannot be said to be illegal. This Writ
Petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner, to
approach Civil Court, as pointed out by the Tahsildar, in
Exhibit. P14 order.

Sd/-

P.V. ASHA

JUDGE

avs

WP(C).No.27015 OF 2020

¶36

¶37

APPENDIX

¶38

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶39

EXHIBIT P1 THE DEATH CERTIFICATE OF LATE T.P.VELAYUDHAN EXHIBIT P2 THE DEATH CERTIFICATE OF KAUSALYA EXHIBIT P3 THE DEATH CERTIFICATE OF V.RADHAKRISHNAN EXHIBIT P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OP NO.917/1997 OF THE FAMILY COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM EXHIBIT P5 THE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE FAMILY MEMBER SHIP CERTIFICATE EXHIBIT P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P8 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P9 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 23.07.2020 EXHIBIT P10 THE TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN IA NO.1/2020 IN CMA NO.33/2020 EXHIBIT P11 THE TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILED REPLY DATED 20.08.2020 EXHIBIT P12 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 09.09.2020 EXHIBIT P13 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 22.09.2020 EXHIBIT P14 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15.10.2020 EXHIBIT P15 A TRUE COPY OF LETTER PUBLISHED ON THE GAZETTE DT 31.7.2009

¶40

WP(C).No.27015 OF 2020

¶41

¶42

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶43

NIL

¶44

avs //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE

P.v.Prakash v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.v.Prakash v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Roshini Jacob, Vs the Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd.

Beji Bhaskaran Vs Debashih Panda

Sinimol M.T. @ Sini Shaji, Vs Union of India

Anirudhan Vs Amarjeet Singh

Abida Kurur Vs the District Collector

Alias K. Kuriakose Vs Kerala Water Authority