Dismissed

K.Chandrasekaran v. The District Collector

Madras HC24 Sept 2019WP/1659/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed to restrain the Block Development Officer from disbursing the deceased employee's monetary benefits to the wife pending the hearing of a civil suit. The High Court held that the wife had a valid legal heir certificate and the civil suit did not pertain to benefits.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed and the writ of mandamus was denied.

K.Chandrasekaran Vs The District Collector — Succession and Inheritance | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 24.09.2019

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶5

W.P.No.1659 of 2019 and W.M.P.No.1859 of 2019

¶6

K.Chandrasekaran ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Collector
Erode District
Erode.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer
Erode.
3.The Tahsildar
Kodumudi Taluk
Erode District.
4.The Block Development Officer
Kodumudi Panchayat Union
Kodumudi
Erode District.
5.M.Sivakami ... Respondents

¶7

Prayer:- Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to forbear the 4^th respondent from disbursing the monetary benefits of the deceased Murugesan who was working as Noon Meal Organiser in Noon Meal Centre at Panchayat Union Elementary School, Perumalkovilpudur in Kodumudi Block to the 5^th respondent till the disposal of the suit in O.S.No.682 of 2018 on the file of Sub-Court, Erode.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.P.P.Shanmugasundaram For Respondents : Mr.R.S.Selvam, Government Advocate for R1 to R3 Mr.E.Balamurugan Special Government Pleader for R4 Mr.C.S.Saravanan for R5

¶9

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

Writ Petition is filed for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to forbear the 4^th respondent from disbursing the monetary benefits of the deceased Murugesan, who was working as Noon Meal Organiser in Noon Meal Centre at Panchayat Union Elementary School, Perumalkovilpudur in Kodumudi Block, to the 5^th respondent till the disposal of the suit in O.S.No.682 of 2018 on the file of Sub-Court, Erode.

¶12

2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 to 3 and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the 4^th respondent. By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal.

¶13

The case of the petitioner is that one Kulandasamy, who owned various properties, died intestate on 22.02.2011 leaving behind his only son K.Murugesan as his legal heir to succeed his estate. Except the said Murugesan, he has no other children. The wife of the said Kulandasamy viz., Pongiammal predeceased him on 06.05.2007, thereby the said Murugesan got absolute right over the said properties. The said Murugesan was working as Noon Meal Organiser in Noon Meal Centre at Panchayat Union Elementary School, Perumalkovilpudhur in Kodumudi Block. The said Murugesan, who is the uncle of the petitioner, during his life time also executed a Will dated 29.05.2013 bequeathing his entire properties, referred above, and died on 14.07.2014 while in service without marriage and issues. The deceased Murugesan had no sisters and brothers.

¶14

While things stood thus, one Muthukumar who is the petitioner's adjacent land owner, often interfered with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said properties, and, therefore, the petitioner filed a suit in O.S.No.173 of 2015 for declaration, declaring the petitioner as the absolute owner of the suit properties and consequential permanent injunction restraining the said Muthukumar from interfering with his possession and enjoyment of the suit properties and on 28.01.2016 the suit was decreed exparte.

¶15

The petitioner has applied to the 3^rd respondent to issue legal heir certificate to the effect that he is the legal heir of the said deceased Murugesan. However, the 3^rd respondent by his memorandum dated 08.02.2016, rejected the petitioner's claim stating that the wife of the deceased Murugesan viz., Sivakami is alive. On 23.01.2018, the petitioner submitted a representation to the 4^th respondent requesting to disburse all the monetary benefits due to the demise of the said Murugesan who nominated the petitioner to receive all such benefits

¶16

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶17

through his Will dated 29.05.2013 and also enclosing necessary documents in support of the same. Thereafter, the 4^th respondent sought clarification from the 1^st respondent on his representation. The 1^st respondent by his memorandum dated 12.03.2018 sent his clarification, which was forwarded to the petitioner by the 4^th respondent by his letter dated 04.04.2018 and the same was received by the petitioner on 26.04.2018. The 5^th respondent claiming to be the legally wedded wife of the deceased Murugesan obtained legal heir certificate dated 10.07.2018 from the Tahsildar, Kodumudi by false representation and claimed the said benefits. Even in the family card of the said Murugesan, the name of the 5^th respondent did not find a place. Thereafter, she filed a suit on 12.10.2018 in O.S No.682 of 2018 on the file of the Sub-Court, Erode arraying the petitioner, his mother and the said Muthukumar as defendants seeking to declare herself as the absolute owner of the suit properties and directing them to deliver vacant possession of the properties and other reliefs, which is pending as on date. Therefore, the petitioner made a representation on 12.11.2018, to the 1^st and 2^nd respondents to take steps to cancel the legal heir certificate issued in favour of the 5^th respondent by the Tahsildar, Kodumudi, for which no reply has been received till date. Hence the present Writ Petition is filed not to disburse the monetary benefits of the said deceased Murugesan in favour of the 5^th respondent, contrary to the Will executed by the said Murugesan.

¶18

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that already, the said Murugesan executed a Will in favour of the petitioner and conveyed the properties, including the retirement benefits, however, the 3^rd respondent, inadvertently granted legal heir certificate in favour of the 5^th respondent, on the strength of which, the 5^th respondent is trying to secure the terminal benefits from the official respondents.

¶19

However, the learned counsel for the petitioner fairly conceded that the suit was filed by the 5^th respondent in respect of the properties and not in respect of the terminal benefits.

¶20

The learned counsel for the 5^th respondent submitted that the 5^th respondent is the legally wedded wife and she is entitled to all the terminal benefits including the properties owned by her husband.

¶21

The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the 4^th respondent filed a counter in which paragraph 4 reads as follows:

¶22

With regard to the averments made para 2 & 3 of the affidavit, it is humbly submitted that the

¶23

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶24

petitioner has to prove the absolute owner of the property. It is true that one Mr.Murugesan was working as Noon Meal Organiser in Noon Meal Centre at Panchayat Union Elementary School, Perumlkovilpudur in Koodumudi Block and he was died on 14.07.2014 which in service leaving behind his legally wedded wife, the 5^th respondent herein Tmt.M.Sivakami and she obtained legal heir certificate from the Tahsildar, Kodumudi dated 10.07.2018.

¶25

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, more particularly the fact that the 3^rd respondent has issued a legal heir certificate in favour of the 5^th respondent, on the strength of which, the 5^th respondent is entitled to receive the terminal benefits belonging to the deceased Murugesan and that the suit has nothing to do with the settlement of the terminal benefits, I am not inclined to entertain the writ petition filed by the petitioner and the relief sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted.

¶26

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/Assistant Registrar(CO) //True Copy// uma Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The District Collector Erode District, Erode. 2.The Revenue Divisional Officer Erode. 3.The Tahsildar Kodumudi Taluk, Erode District. 4.The Block Development Officer Kodumudi Panchayat Union Kodumudi, Erode District +1 cc to Mr.P.P.Shanmugasundaram, Advocate, S.R.No.82067 +1 cc to Mr.C.S.Saravanan, Advocate, S.R.No.82385 +1 cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.82810 W.P.No.1659 of 2019 and W.M.P.No.1859 of 2019 SS(CO) SSM(04/11/2019)

¶27

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

K.Chandrasekaran v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Chandrasekaran v. The District Collector

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

B.Manthra Vs The Member Secretary

A.Lourdu Jeyarani Vs The Additional Registrar

V.chandrasekaran Vs The Sub Collector

R.Balakrishnan Vs State of Tamil Nadu

Dr.T.E.Thiruvengadam Vs Repco Bank

N.Palani, Retd. Office Manager Vs The Secretary to Government